I have a single shot 1885 in 260 Remington.

I like to shoot long bullets like the Barnes 127 LRX, and the rap against the 260 Rem is for typical short-action magazines the bullets need to be seated too deep, taking up potential powder volume and limiting velocity.

But cartridge OAL isn't a limitation with a single shot. For those of you that know the 260 Rem cartridge, would it be worth it for me to have the throat lengthened? What might I gain in velocity?

Please don't suggest other cartridges (or ask me to post pictures of the rifle!)... just share the likely benefits of lengthening the throat on a 260 Rem.

Thanks,
GC

It will change nothing. Shoot a better bullet and undoubtedly get rid of the schitty scope and mounting system.

Hint.............

Hey BS, those initials work for you. You don't know what you are talking about. It is an extremely accurate rifle.

About 1/4 of the percentage of increased powder capacity, which you can figure by measuring water capacity at the present seating depth and at the depth permitted by your proposed longer throat. Mule Deer has a 1 in 4 rule about this. In plain English, not much. Why not just chase the lands as your throat wears?

FYI, including restrictions in your post as to what responses you desire is like tossing blood in a shark tank.

Cheeser,

What scope does it wear? What mounting system does it wear? What COAL and at what speed? What is your version of "extremely accurate" and at what distance(s)? Congratulations?!?

Hint...............

From what I gather the rap is more about the newer high BC bullets having long noses whose ogives get into the case neck when the overall length is constrained.

What's the twist in that barrel? IIRC the 1885's were twisted on the slow side for a 6.5mm and this may limit your bullet selection.

Don't spook her away...she's doing GREAT.

Hint................(grin)

It is a 1-in-9.5 inch twist.

Cheeser,

What scope does it wear? What mounting system does it wear? What COAL and at what speed? What is your version of "extremely accurate" and at what distance(s)? Congratulations?!?

Hint...............

I seriously doubt the scope and mounting system has any effect whatsoever on cartridge length.
Many of the long, high BC bullets actually have a relatively short shank so don't require a long throat to stay ahead of the neck/shoulder juncture. Within reason, seating below this juncture is probably no big deal. The thing is, the short neck of the 260 means that throating for a specific long bullet means that you might lose versatility. I built one260 with a long throat to allow me to seat some Sierra bullets with a very long shank. This 260 was built on a Mauser so I had plenty of mag length. The bullets had to be seated very deeply with the standard throat. Lengthening the throat worked great but I could forget about trying to touch the lands with many other bullets. Lengthening the throat will give you a slight increase in effective case capacity but not so much that velocities would end up that much higher. GD

Neck length = 0.260" = 1 bullet diameter. Conventional wisdom would say that's adequate length. Never been a problem with my .260

I'm thinking the OP would be lucky to gain 50 fps, assuming a 5% capacity (+2.5 gr) increase.

I don't think there usually is an issue with the standard throat. It may require that very long bullets be seated a little deep but it allows light, short bullets to still be seated near the land; if one desires it. If the throat is lengthened though, to accomodate a long bullet, the throat may be too long to allow the short bullet to reach the lands while still staying in the case. This is a conundrum which faces rifle builders, ammunition manufacturers, and handloaders. Winchester ran into this issue with the 264 when they offered two loadings; the 100 grain and the 140. They addressed this by throating the rifles short for compatibility with the 100 then produced a two diameter 140 to fit the short throat while being seated out to a greater COAL. My 260 with the long throat is capable of using a long bullet with a short ogive but is, perhaps, not so great with with short bullets. Since I have no intention of using light bullets in it, that doesn't really matter but, to someone else, it might. GD

MM, Thanks.

GD, Thanks.

DUMBdog,

Your inability to connect a single fhuqking dot,is VERY "impressive". Congratulations?!?

Bless your heart for trying though.

Hint...........

You silly fat bitch! Let’s get rick to set up a man to man slug fest.bring that hat for dinner the night of. PS you are a pussy in advance. Hint.

Oh my...yet another Brokedick is in over her pointy head. Congratulations?!?

HINT..................

Grousechaser, with your current throat, seat the 127 barnes .050 off the lands, use R#26, find pressure, then start playing with primer choices. I would start with a cci 250. I would not hesitate to use the 127 on elk as they shoot holes through deer from butt to shoulder exits.

We started finding great accuracy around 3000 and up.

Stick is correct, it is a schitty bullet, and expensive. For another better schitty short range bullet, a 129g Hornady proved to be just as effective with great penetration and expansion making great hog bullets...at least you can live with the price.

The 260 loves the 143 eld-x and 140g SST with R#26, velocity is going to shock you. Tough Lapua brass will help make your life easier because this round likes a hot load with the 143's around 2900 at least.

I made brass from Lapua Palma brass(small primer with cci 450) and turned necks, HARD TO KILL THIS BRASS.

If you want to shoot a 130 ish grain bullet, then go Accubond. We had 130g bergers not go through deer...no blood trail is not a good thing when they run off.

R#26 Re-defines the 260 Remington, after you find pressure, best accuracy will be within 1.5g of a max load for your rifle, don't be scared to find pressure in your rifle. H4350 and H4831 will suck hind tit as you soon will find out.

I would not lengthen the throat. Use a long drop tube powder funnel from Forster or make a long drop tube from an arrow shaft for slower burning powders. OAL on the 260 with std reamer has got you in a bind with std magazine Length to begin with, lengthening would make chasing throat geometry impossible.

Those Low Walls aren't twisted very tight.

I have Low Wall .260 as well.
I run the Sierra 85gr hp for fun and practice. The Hornaday 129 IL for hunting both blacktail and elk.

I’ve killed two big Roosevelt cow elk with a single round apiece, the longest was 257 yards....both with the 129.
I’ve loaded and tested the Hornaday 140 IL and it ran just fine, didn’t see any stability issues, but haven’t hunted it.

If you value that nice rifle, you’ll not alter it in anyway.... no recoil pad, chamber “improvements”, or anything else.
It’s a gem just the way it is, enjoy it.

What are you running for glass?

I emailed Browning very recently asking exactly what the Low Wall .260 was twisted and how many were manufactured for that cartridge. I’ve yet to get an answer. What little literature I’ve been able find on Browning Arms says 1/10, but it’s not firearm specific.I’ve heard both 1/9.5 and 1/10.

I’ve played with the Hornaday 140 IL bullet a bit and I didn’t have any issues - but since buying a Kimber Hunter in 6.5 CM, I plan to just run 140’s in it and lighter bullets in the LW.

Even though you said not to if it were mine and I wanted more performance I would go AI. It will cost about the same as re-cutting the throat and will produce an honest 150 fps gain. Since the 280AI is legitimized it won't hurt the re-sale price if that is a consideration. Otherwise I wouldn't bother altering the throat.

It’s a .260....... not a .280

I have two Ruger 260s and one Rem VLS...

They each had short throats... I had each one throated out to handle 140 grain Sierra HPs, at magazine lenght... using IMR 4350, 140s run 2750 fps out of the 22 inch barrel Rugers and 2800 fps out of the 26 inch Rem VLS...

I'll have to lay with RL 26 with the Hornady ELD bullets.. since I have plenty of both...

for brass, I've always necked down Win 308 or 7/08 brass....

Those Ruger 260's are worth some money these days. Hard to find

These two won't be going anywhere until I'm dead...both stainless...one still with Zytel Stock, the other a Ruger Laminate take off... have a pair of twin 243s also, Ruger SA stainless....

Then a non identical pair of twin Rugers on a LA, blued and wood.... 6.5 x 55 and 7 x 57...

GC,

As has been pointed out, a lot of folks out there mistakenly lengthen the throat to allow those long VLD type bullets to be seated out farther. The reason the VLD types are long is the length of the nose, not the bearing surface.

My Browning Low Wall .260 is a 1:9” twist. I have seen other numbers posted in various places, 1:9.5 or 1:10, but mine is a 1:9. That being said if yours is truly a 1:9.5”, I would definitely seat some of whatever VLD type bullets I wanted to shoot to the lands and see for myself how significant the powder intrusion is. I would then shoot said bullets to see if they were adequately stabilizing and give me satisfactory accuracy. If you don’t want to do that, put the bullet specs into a stability calculator and see what it tells you about likely stability. JBM has one as does the Berger Bullets website and I am sure there are others. The Barnes website shows a 1:8” twist minimum for the 127gr LRX so I very much doubt you would get satisfactory results from your 1:9.5” twist.

There are other very suitable options. As mentioned above, I’ve had very good results from both the 129gr Hornady interlock, and the 130gr Nosker Accubond. Both shoot well from my Low Wall and both perform very well on game.

While my Low Wall shoots very well, it is not the rifle I choose when I’m wanting to reach way out there. Effectively shooting long range requires a scope well suited to it with good tracking target type turrets and enough elevation travel. Such requirements usually mean the scope is fairly large, which dictates big sturdy mounts and all that is just out of place on the petite, trim Low Wall. You could go with a good reliable 1” scope with a decent ballistic reticle and do some great work out to 600 or so, but after that, I’d be grabbing one of my rigs designed for the task. I’ve had some really good results from a 3-9 conquest with the Rapid Z 600 reticle but had a HD5 Conquest crap out on me, so often you are rolling the dice.

If your Low Wall is a Browning, there were relatively few of them made in .260 which means they are somewhat collectible. There is no way I would molest mine and potentially destroy that value.

All of this was just a very long winded way of recommending against you modifying your Low Wall but I hope it helps you with your decision.

John

John,

Weren't you able to get good results with the Berger 130 VLD?

It would be hard to add anything to what Hondo64d, wrote.....

Mine only gets to hunt on days/places where I can limit any damage to it.
I bought the Kimber Hunter 6.5cm to take the abuse of quads/trucks, poor weather or terrain.
The Low Wall is a legacy firearm that’ll stay in my family.

[/quote]

It’s a .260....... not a .280
[/quote]

Oops that reading comprehension thing. I never thought the 260AI was a worthwhile step up to re-bore a rifle. If starting from scratch then a viable option.

Mathman and Hondo hit the nail on the head the Low Wall will top out with the 140s due to twist not throat length. The beauty of the Low Wall is a great looking stalking rifle that is a joy to carry and shoot. Mine in 243 has I believe a 100% run of one shot kills to the point I don't recall how many the total #s are. I guess there is something in a single shot making you make the first shot count a little more.

I don’t recall trying the VLDs in my Low Wall.

John

No wonder my memory of that is hazy.

Jeezus Fhuqking Gawd...your STUPID is huge. Congratulations?!?

Hint...…………………….

Keith: thanks for this helpful response. I'll try that #26!

For $160 you can get a pacific 6.5-06 Ackley reamer.
For $200 you can get a Redding 6.5-06 Ackley die set.

^^^^^ This ^^^^^

If I had a single shot 260 and wanted more performance, I'd rechamber it to 6.5-06 AI.

The 1-9" ROT is generally considered too slow for optimal performance with bullets longer than about 1.3".

EDIT: If the 260 has enough case capacity for your needs, I've settled on the 130 grain AB for medium game in my 260s. I've found that the 129 grain Hornady SST shoots to approximately the same POA/POI as the 130 grain AB, providing a less expensive option for practice.

I personally think that running a reamer into that little Browning is a poor idea.
I’d have to look, but I’m doubtful that the shank is long enough to chamber the longer round.

Regardless, more importantly, to me, is the loss of collectors value. There’s just a handful of them out there.
A 130AB out of a .260 is capable of taking any game that you’d commonly turn a .260 loose on.

My $0.02

There's no way I'd start cutting on that rifle.

She still hasn't fired a shot.

Hint...………………….

THIS ^^^^^^
The single shots are beautiful rifles, leave it alone. Lots of bullets out there to test, you'll find one that optimizes that twist and throat. That's my 2 cent.
But. I just re-barreled an old Remington 660 I had laying around to the standard 260 with a 8 inch twist. Going to make up the first set of loads today for testing. Lots of 6.5's out there in bolt guns, in the newer cartridges like the Creed with fast twists. Or grab a standard length action and be-barrel or re-chamber to the 6.5 of your choice.

Don't worry,she ain't gonna do schit.

Hint...............