Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Why you guys so down on.....

Hello from Scotland~

Can i ask you "Yanks" why you go and develope a "fantastic" light recoiling highly accurate, cartridge namely the .260 Rem and then seem to shun it ?? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

The .260 will kill any of your large non-danderous game, Elk, Moose, yet you guys seem to have "no faith" <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> in it.

The B.C 's of 6.5 bullets are to die for the envy of a great many calibres <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

The old 6.5 x55 has "PROVED" that 6.5 kill BIG moose no problem with less punishment to the hunter than these big magnum calibres.

It seems to me that very few rifles are avialble in this wonderful calibre i wanted a .260 Rem but a .308 came in half the price so i went with that.

The .260 can do the work of the .243 yet handle big game that the .243 can not touch ! You get a huge return for small amount of powder and light recoil.......

So why are you guys so down on it ?? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> Reckon the gun writters have to take much of the blame...............

Englander

Here are just a few good reasons. The 308 Win is also a light recoil round, in my opinion, and is a word standard, our military round with all those advantages, more powerful and useful therefore on bigger game and finally we know that it really does not matter much what you shoot game with as the results are always about the same until the caliber gets well over .30.

The 260 Rem also is a new cartridge and since there always was tons of overlap in the number of adequate cartridges it's really just one of a forgotten bunch. However odd ball cartridges are good for the enthusiast as it keeps them interested. To the practical man all one needs is a Featherweight 30/06 or 308 for everything.

Of course there are a few customers for light loads such as children, ladies and the infirm. So there is a market for a "260" but not just a big one.

Then there is the unorganized bunch who want to shoot stuff with the smallest bullet possible. This is not that small a group as they don't get caught failing to kill stuff very often as in hunting wounded game runs off.

In summary new products sell so we will always find new cartridges being stuck up on the wall.

This is a question that puzzles me as well. I own both a 6.5x55 and a .260 Rem. They are both fine rifles and certainly adequate for the whitetail and mule deer that I hunt with them. Indeed, I would not hesitate to hunt moose with either round, but generally use a .30-06 for the bigger stuff. I do not, however, see anyone else in my neck of the woods using 6.5mm rounds. Most guys seem to favour a .270, .30-06, or .308. Quite a few are still carrying .303s.

Hunters interested in new rifles seem bedazzled by the magnum concept. Well, its their toy and their money, so each to his own preference. Still, I agree that hunters are missing out on a happy experience with the light recoiling and efficient 6.5mms.

The 260 is a heck of a deer cartridge and, since deer are the most widely hunted big game in North American, you'd think that some writer would champion it. In theory, it has a lot going for it; light recoil, light firearm, good bullets, etc. That said, a lot of cartridges that look good on paper and work well in the field have failed to capture the hunting public's interest; 222 Magnum, 256 Newton, 284, 356, and 358 to cite a few.

There aren't that many rifles available in 260. As I recall, only Kimber, Remington, and Ruger currently chamber it. Browning, Savage and Styer have, but Savage only made a few 11s and Styers are uncommon anywhere that I have been. Ammunition is also a problem in many rural areas and the big retailers, Wal-Mart etc., don't carry it. In the course of a year I see a fair number of rifles in the field and at the range. The most common are, indeed, the most common; 223, 22-250, 243, 270, 7mm Rem Mag, 30-30, 308, and 30-06. Ammunition for these cartridges is inexpensive and easy to find. Entry level rifle packages came be purchased at almost every Wal-Mart or K-Mart in the USA in 243, 270, 7mm Rem Mag, and 30-06 for less than $400.

The guy who is my hunting and shooting mentor has shot at least 100 deer with the 260 and it, along with the 22-250, are his very favorite deer hunting cartridges. At 6'4" and 250ish, he isn't the sort of infirm recoil shy person that Don talked about. He is a guy who, in the words of Jeff Cooper, shoots straight and speaks the truth. He is a pretty fair gunsmith and could easily afford to buy or make any firearm that he could ever want. What he hunts with are a matched pair of custom Remington 700s, a 22-250 and a 260.

You are mistaken in 1 area. The European 6.5mm rifles made their bones with long 160 grain round nose bullets with very high sectional density numbers. Although not fast, they would penetrate and keep on going. The short action rifles that the 260 is chambered in limits the OAL of the loaded cartridge and the 160 grain bullets would need to be loaded deep and would impinge on the powder capacity. However, the design of the X bullet makes the 160 grain 6.5mm bullets obsolete by giving one the combination of higher velocity and a tough bullet with great SD and BC numbers.

Unless some name gun writer takes the 260 as his pet project, like Layne Simpson did the 7mm-08, I think that it is on track to fail in the same manor as the 284 and 358. Even Jim Charmichel, the guy who claims to be its father, has nothing to say about it. You'd think he was in the NBA the way he denies his child.

Jeff

I think that it's been pretty well covered. If you have a rifle like a 308, 270 or even a 6.5x55, what's the point to a 260?



I looked at one but bought another 6.5x55 instead. That's because I don't go in for all the hype about premium bullets. My rifles don't need them because of what and where I hunt. Most of them like the heavyweights which the 260 doesn't really handle too well. Why mess around looking for a bullet for the 260 when I've got other rifles that will do the same thing?



In North America, there's lots of hunters that have a rifle around the same performance level. Most probably don't have a reason to buy one. Many would see it as useless duplication.



Safe Shooting! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Steve Redgwell

303british.com

Gentlemen,

Sept. 2003 Hunting page 36.

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Englander�

Steve Redgwell pretty well hit the �nail-on-the-head�. We have so many �over-laps� in calibers and bullet performance these days, especially with the �short and short-short� magnums, that it borders on being RIDICULOUS!!!

I only have 4 center-fire hunting rifles, but they cover the entire spectrum of the kind of hunting I�ve done since I started varmint and big game hunting in the early 1960�s� a .222 in a heavy barreled Sako for varmints, a .44 magnum Ruger old style Carbine for deer/wild boar in heavy cover, a Savage Model 99 in .300 Savage for deer/black bear/wild boar in more open woods, on the pipe line or under the high-tension lines and a .338 Winchester magnum for everything else that the .300 Savage won�t handle (which isn�t much).

I have developed accurate, high-velocity loads for all four rifles and there�s nothing they can�t handle by changing rifles, bullets and/or muzzle velocities.

If I did a lot of long range shooting deer or antelope, I might need a flat-shooting .270, but after one really �bad� experience at long range shooting which ended with my getting the deer, but it was a �messy kill�, the experience caused me to vow to NEVER take 400+ yard shots again.. and I never have.

Therefore, a rifle with a �point-blank-range� of 250 yards is just FINE with me� �cause I won�t take on a target further than 250 yards from me. I�ll either stalk closer� or refuse the shot.

In view of all of this, I think you can see why I wouldn�t have any need for a .260 Remington� and I think a lot of American hunters are like me. They have a couple of rifles which, between them, do �most everything the man wants to do. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />


Strength & Honor�

Ron T.

Gentlemen~

Im disappointed by the response although not suprised, its as if you "Yanks" have a subconsious problem with "metric" its called .260 but you know really its 6.5mm ! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Christ ! Even the the .260 owners how try to praise it ! And end up selling it short ! And still lack faith...... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Im sorry but the "overlap" excuse is a bit weak..... my speer manual shows over 70 rifle calibres almost all "OVERLAP" and 3 or 4 calibres would cover all the other uses............Why then is the .280 popular when the 7x64 did the same thing decades before !!

Look at wildcats ! Milllions of the blooming things "overlap " now your talking <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Yes if you already own a .257 , 7x57 , .308 , or similar calibre deer rifle then yes why a .260 ?? But lets not forget there are new hunters born every day they could do far worse than a .260 Rem

Lets not forget "light recoil" and moderate muzzle blast lends its self to ACCURATE shooting..........The remarks about it being for the old / infirm and children dont even warrent comment and are to silly for response. As if a "REAL MAN" need's a hard kicking rifle ??

Although saying this i would certinally recommend a youngster to buy a .260 Rem over a ruddy .243 win also for the "one gun" hunter what a chose a rifle suitable for anything from fox, white tail to big moose.

I do how ever agree with the gentleman concerning .308 Win i love mine <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> a very versatile cartridge indeed.

B.C of .260 beats the pants off .270 more for less <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> 6.5mm is doing very well with the 1000 yard guys......

The under lying "feeling" be it conscious or subconscious are that these little 6.5mm bullets are to small for moose Elk etc..... Dead is dead

Lets not forget Bell felled the largest of all land mamals with his low velocity 6.5mm 160 gn fmj bullets <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> Not that im recommending it as suitable for dangerous game, that would be silly <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Again "NO faith"..............makes "No Sense"

Regarding 160 gn bullets in .260 Rem a buddy of mine informs me the Hornady 160 gn bullet gives excellant accuracy in his Remington Model

Remington has to shoulder the majority of the blame for turning its back on its own offspring, and gunwriters a close second for letting there personal prejudice and ignorance colour there coverage of this fine cartridge.

Englander

Remington fathered the .260 like pigs can fly. 6.5-08s were around and used by silhouette and highpower shooters well before the advent of the .260. I can neither confirm nor deny that Jim Carmichael was the first person ever to use a .308 body with a .264 bore.

And who gives a flip whether or not some other guy is or isn't touting this cartridge or that cartridge. What matters is how it shoots for you, and can you get good brass and bullets for it without paying an arm and a leg. I suppose you wouldn't love a girl unless every guy in town was giving her high marks in the sack?

Sheesh, And they say France is a big producer of whine <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Go shoot your .260 some more, and forget about what all us colonials are doing you silly pom <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Regards,
Scott (owner of 2 M96 Swedes with a .260 on its way)

I believe that Ken Waters may have been the first to neck the .308 to 6.5mm with his .263 Express.....

It appears that you like the cartridge Englander. That's fine.



I have no problems with metric cartridges, and neither do most Americans. It seems that your likes are at odds with others, which appears to be the root of the response.



Comparing wildcats to factory cartridges is not a valid argument. Almost all wildcats are created for personal reasons vs a profit potential of a commerical enterprise. People that choose a wildcat subsequent to its creation do so because of personal appeal. They may see it as something that fills a specific need, or want an "off beat" chambering. There is more expense and work involved and no boxes of ammunition available at the gun shop.



New hunters may get one, but like any product, marketing is the key to success. Who knows what goes on in Remington's board room? They may have decided that the market was too crowded or are waiting to see if the general public feels that it fills a niche. It's their cartridge, so they can choose to push it or watch it die.



I'm weary of the discussions about Bell and others. What they did given the cartridges available at the time could be successfully argued as grandstanding or just plain stupid. Some Inuit people in Northern Canada kill polar bears with the 22 hornet and people attempt to sail the oceans in 16 foot boats too.



As I said earlier, who knows what goes on in Remington's board room? Have they turned their back on the 260? Perhaps you could write and ask.



WRT gunwriters, you will find that some like the 260 while others could care less. Sounds like what you'd hear from the general public to me. Both the naysayers and the supporters that exist in the goo of writerdom express their opinions. They have no obligation to "sell" anything.



Truly great cartridges don't exist because of ad hype or writers, they just work well.



Safe Shooting! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Steve Redgwell

303british.com

I also wonder about the lack of support/enthusiasm for the 6.5mms in the US, which would include the 260 Rem. I have been researching cartridges in anticipation of a new "go to" rifle for most of North American game (less the dangerous set). In the research the 6.5's always look very good with the 7mm a close second.

I believe that the reasons cited above help to explain some of the lack of interest/support. Another is that the effectiveness of hunting cartridges is often simplified to just retained energy, which doesn't account for the penetration effectiveness of the high SDs that the 6.5's bring to the hunt.

I have been looking for a 260 Rem but they are indeed hard to come by. If you want a short magnum, those are much easier to locate.

Best of luck in your hunting and here's hoping that I can get that 260 Rem.

LoboHunter