Two more .260 Rem questions

[Shmackey]

At the current rate I'm shooting, I will be due for a new barrel on my trusty rifle in early 2012. (It's a Remington .308 SPS with nothing Remington left but the action and barrel.)

I shoot mostly from 100 to 600 yards, occasionally stretching out to 1000 and making lots of misses. I shoot only my own handloads--usually 175-grain SMKs.

Question 1: Is there any reason not to do the new barrel in .260 Remington? The biggest issue I can find is the stockpile of .30-caliber MatchKings I'd need to trade out. I assume barrel life is shorter for .260 as well. I don't shoot F-TR or anything where I'm required to use a particular caliber.

Question 2: Given that the advantage of 6.5-mm rounds lies in sectional density/ballistic coefficients, why wouldn't we be able to cook up something even better in .243?

 

[Afy]

Or 6 BR..
The 105 Scenar performs quite well out to 1000 for targets. At deer ranges you should be able to get them without an issue.

The .260 is an excellent choice as well.

 

[Shmackey]

I suppose a 700 short action can be rebarreled to 6mm BR, though I'm not sure what needs to happen in the magazine box for those short cartridges.

It's actually a pretty interesting idea, but (unlike with .260) I'd have to scrap my 1000+ pieces of very good .308 brass.

 

[Zak Smith]

Just do it. The .260 hits a sweet spot in terms of long-range capability, recoil, cost, and barrel life.

The .243 is more overbore than thus will have less barrel life. The selection of high BC bullets in .243 is worse, with none AFAIK even advertised over 0.6. Most people I know who shoot .243 (or similar) use the DTAC.

 

[kludge]

Or the 6.5 Creedmore... a bit easier to get long match bullets into the magazine. Pretty much identical ballistics otherwise.

 

[Zak Smith]

Not really.

Both put the rear of the bearing surface below the case neck. The .260 has more case capacity.

All it does is change how the cartridge "looks."

 

[Howard Roark]

I've shot .243 and .260 for years in competition. Zak is absolutely correct, the .260 is the way to go.

Not that the .308 or .243 won't get the job done, they both will, but at a price.

The .243 and .260 will shoot inside the .308 at any range. The .243 has lighter recoil due to the lighter bullets (105-115) used at mid-range. It also burns barrels faster. We are getting less than 2500 rounds before pulling the barrel, Bartlein SS.

I've decided to rebarrel with a Hart in .260 for accross the course. The recoil is more akin to the .308 due to the heavier bullets that I shoot (140 and 142) but still isn't bad. I get 3000 rounds plus out of a .260.

The USAMU high power team is shooting the .260 in match rifle this year at Perry during NRA week. Sherri has already shattered several long standing records including the 1000 point agg. and 800 point agg. using a T2K in .260. The team has also unoffically broken the team match record and will most likely make it official in a couple of weeks.

 

[Get R Done Guns]

If you shoot the "heavier" bullets the 260 really has no straight up advantage. .308 is tough to beat on long range shooting. If you already have the stuff set up for it then stick with it.

If you are just wanting something new, the 260 is a good cartridge that will get the job done like the 308. Look at the 6mm BR though because it is really a joy to shoot if you do change calibers.

 

[Zak Smith]

If you shoot the "heavier" bullets the 260 really has no straight up advantage. .308 is tough to beat on long range shooting. If you already have the stuff set up for it then stick with it.

False.

_Bullet_           _BC_ _MV_         0     200     400     600     800    1000 | YARDS
260 139 Lapua     0.615 2900 >    0.00    1.96    8.24   19.56   36.79   61.01 | wind (inches)
260 139 Lapua     0.615 2800 >    0.00    2.06    8.66   20.59   38.77   64.34 | wind (inches)
308 155 Lapua     0.508 2900 >    0.00    2.39   10.20   24.53   46.82   78.74 | wind (inches)
308 175 SMK       0.51* 2700 >    0.00    2.72   11.62   28.08   53.93   90.92 | wind (inches)

260 139 Lapua     0.615 2900 >   -0.00    0.36    1.64    3.25    5.17    7.45 | drop (mil)
260 139 Lapua     0.615 2800 >   -0.00    0.41    1.80    3.54    5.61    8.09 | drop (mil)
308 155 Lapua     0.508 2900 >   -0.00    0.37    1.73    3.48    5.65    8.35 | drop (mil)
308 175 SMK       0.51* 2700 >   -0.00    0.48    2.09    4.17    6.78   10.08 | drop (mil)

Loads are two each of the most common LR loads in .260 and .308 respectively.

 

[js2013]

I went thru the same decision making process, 6.5 vs 6mm. The big advantage of the 6 IMHO is recoil. There's a bunch of good bullets in the 6mm range. BC might not be as high as a 6.5 but they can be pushed faster. Plus 6mm bullets are cheaper. Barrel life is shorter although Joe Hendricks with his 6CM (competition match) says using certain powders he can get around 50% greater barrel life than a 6XC with equal ballistics (interesting reading).

 

[Shmackey]

I don't really care about recoil. I've shot enough 12-gauge rounds that my .308 doesn't really feel like much.

 

[2zulu1]

How about the 6.5x284?

Bob

 

[kludge]

Not really.

Both put the rear of the bearing surface below the case neck. The .260 has more case capacity.

All it does is change how the cartridge "looks."

Yes, really.

Both cases have an identical capacity of 53gr H20. Neck lengths are also identical.

6.5 Creedmore case = 1.920"
COL=2.820"
.260 Remington case = 2.035"
COL=2.800"


We'll give the .260 the benefit of the doubt and say that it can also be loaded to 2.820". With case capacities and neck lengths being equal, more of the bullet will be "in the case" (below the neck) in the .260 giving less room for powder.

0.115" is "a bit" easier, IMO.

 

[Zak Smith]

I am pretty certain I measured the capacities and the 6.5CM was smaller when I got the first brass from Hornady. I will measure again and post when I get home in 10 days.

In either case it is moot because even at 2.800 .260 loads are not limited by case capacity using present powders. So no advantage.

 

[Shmackey]

How about the 6.5x284?

Bob

I think you need to do some unusual stuff to get the 6.5x284 to play nice in a short action.

 

[Howard Roark]

COL doesn't mean much if you single load. My load with a 142 SMK measures 2.880. I blow primers before I run out of space for powder, IMR 4350.

The 6.5x284 single loads into a Rem 700 short action OK if you cant it a little. I had one in a MAK tube gun for a while.

 

[DIM]

using 139 gr Lapua Scenar I had MAX OAL 2.840" and using Nosler CC 2.760" in Savage LRP

 

[Kachok]

While not a 1000 yd shooter I will say that the 6.5mm are legendary at the range, my 6.5X55 has impressed everyone that has tried it. Recoil is not an issue even with my featherweight 6lbs rifle and max power handloads so I would think you would get a similar result with a 260 or 6.5 Creed since they are nearly identical in performance. Nothing wrong with a .243 cal they just never impressed me the way my Sweed does.

 

[GooseGestapo]

I've loaded Hornady 140gr SST's in the .260 and as Howard Roark stated, I'm maxing out pressures before I ran out of space with IMR4350, RL17 and RL19. I also had no capacity issues with a Sierra 160 and RL22. I hit max pressures and case capacity at same time.

My only "gripe" is that the 1/9" twist of the Remington factory barrel won't sufficiently stabilize the 140gr SST. a 1/8" would have been much better. With the factory throat, I'm at 2.810" and "touching" the lands. Remington got the .260 "right". Just missed on the twist rate and very long bullets (SST's and A-Max's). I've had no issues with "flat-base" bullets, however. The Speer's and Hornady 140's have been splendidly accurate.

I suggest if the original poster does rebarrel to the .260, that you be sure to get a 1/7.7" or 1/8" twist barrel.

 

[Howard Roark]

1/8" twist is the way to go.

1 5/8" group at 300 yards, open sights shot out of a sling, not supported.