View Full Version : .260 Remington and the AR10
Just finished reading an article about the new DPMS LR in .260 Remington. Although the rifle was the prototype, the review showed promise of this cartridge used in this platform. Since the .260 is based on the 08 family, conversion for the AR10 would only require a barrel swap. Really like the idea of shooting the high BC 6.5mm bullets. Brass is readily available too.
Wonder if John Noveske has the time to make me another barrel as the .243 Winchester barrel he made is a 1/2 moa shooter with 107 gr SMK @ 2950 FPS 10 feet from the muzzle.
K.L. Davis
07-24-06, 20:20
The 260Rem is an interesting round...
I remember it was introduced about 15 years ago, the community had talked a lot about variants of the 308... naturally the 6mm version did extremely well and it was a smart move by Winchester to not go with the original name!
There were a lot of folks that swore if a major name came out with a 6.5-08 it would take over the market -- obviously, it did not.
Names of cartridges are really a bigger deal than a lot of folks think about... the 7-08 did well, but does not enjoy the fame of its siblings on either side. For a long time, manufacturers have been scared of metric names for US cartridges, the American shooters seem to not warm up to the so well -- I have said for many years that if JC had named it the 400 Magnum, it would be one of the most popular pistol cartridges around.
So, the 260 is the 260... but I wonder if it would have not done better with a metric name? Many shooters know the 6.5 and want one... but Remmy has played the "name game" before with okay results: 280 Rem --> 7mm Rem Express --> 280 Rem
In any case, the 260 is a great cartridge with outstanding ballistics. I for one hope to see it in use more and more...
I call John and asked about the availability of a .260 Remington barrel for the AR10. He said hopefullly by year's end. He is pretty much swamped with orders right now with his existing catalog. Oh well, I guess it would make one hell of a Christmas gift!
In the meantime, I was thinking about have a .260 Remington barrel made for one of my Savages. However, I really do not think I will gain anything over my 7mm WSM Savage that is long-throated especially for the Berger 180 gr VLD which has a BC of .698. Talk about shooting a laser beam from a bolt gun.........
In the meantime, I was thinking about have a .260 Remington barrel made for one of my Savages.
Numrich has Savage barrels in 260 Remington right now for $135. It got one, and it looks great. It will be a while until I am able to install it though.
Numrich has Savage barrels in 260 Remington right now for $135. It got one, and it looks great. It will be a while until I am able to install it though.
YO:eek: ! Thanks for the heads up......surfing over there right now.
03humpalot
12-02-06, 14:06
Fellas,
is the .260 ammo widely available yet(factory)? I am interested in one down the road but went through the 6.8mm spc fiasco a few years ago and dont wish to repeat that experience.
Thanks in advance.
Fellas,
is the .260 ammo widely available yet(factory)? I am interested in one down the road but went through the 6.8mm spc fiasco a few years ago and dont wish to repeat that experience.
Thanks in advance.
What 6.8 SPC fiasco do you speak of........? Considering the cartridge was orignally developed with a small amount of funds and the company that was contracted to help develop the it drug their heels, the 6.8 SPC is doing just fine.
As for the .260 remington, try searching Midway or other big online vendors and see what they have/keep in stock. This will give you a rough estimate of availability/demand.
Ironically, Midway only offers 2 brands with 5 selections of that 15 year old cartridge, but has 3 brands and 10 options of the 4 year old fiasco.;)
ETA: If you are serious about going with the .260 Remington, it would be prudent to look into handloading and scrap the idea of factory ammo, as most of the ammo is for hunting and not LR precision shooting. The selection of high BC bullets in 6.5mm also warrant the need to handload to achieve optimum performance.
03humpalot
12-03-06, 10:01
What 6.8 SPC fiasco do you speak of........? Considering the cartridge was orignally developed with a small amount of funds and the company that was contracted to help develop the it drug their heels, the 6.8 SPC is doing just fine.
Well where to begin, first i bought a 6.8mm upper and ammo was not available for around 8 months. Then when ammo was finally available it did not meet the performance standards originally reported, then we discovered that most ammo would not in fact actually feed from standard 5.56mm magazines despite claims that it would.
That is the fiasco i was talking about.
I am not interested in handloading my own ammo so i guess i will move on but thanks for the advice anyway.
Fellas,
is the .260 ammo widely available yet(factory)? I am interested in one down the road but went through the 6.8mm spc fiasco a few years ago and dont wish to repeat that experience.
Thanks in advance.
.260 ammo is pretty widely available, it has been around a long time. However, even it it weren't you could simply neck down .308 cases.
Alpha Sierra
12-05-06, 15:22
However, I really do not think I will gain anything over my 7mm WSM Savage that is long-throated especially for the Berger 180 gr VLD which has a BC of .698. Talk about shooting a laser beam from a bolt gun.........
You would gain a significant reduction of recoil. If all you shoot are five or ten rounds out of your bolt gun, it won't matter. Sit down and shoot 60 to 70 rounds in an afternoon and will be on your way to a flinch.
The 260 Remington has plenty of ballistics horsepower.
Alpha Sierra
12-05-06, 15:23
ETA: If you are serious about going with the .260 Remington, it would be prudent to look into handloading and scrap the idea of factory ammo, as most of the ammo is for hunting and not LR precision shooting. The selection of high BC bullets in 6.5mm also warrant the need to handload to achieve optimum performance.
Big plus 1.
Alpha Sierra
12-05-06, 15:25
.260 ammo is pretty widely available, it has been around a long time. However, even it it weren't you could simply neck down .308 cases.
It's actually easier on the brass to neck up 243 brass as it is only a .4 mm increase in diameter.
Use Winchester if you want good quality at a good price, Lapua if you want the best (for about $15/100 more).
Alpha Sierra
12-05-06, 15:27
Don't forget to pick a fast twist if you want to shoot the high BC bullets (Sierra 142, Berger 140, Lapua 139). 1/8 is ideal, as it will stabilize the big ones as well as the smaller ones (Lapua 123, Sierra 123, Berger 120).
I have been shooting .260 Remington for about 6 months in one of my AI-AW's. In the last year, approximately 10 of our local long-range shooters have built or rebarreled rifles in 260 Remington (one or two have gone with the Ackley version of it).
Why? It's simple-- 260 has better external ballistics than 308, full stop. If you compare the best long-range 308 loads (155 Scenar at 2800-2950fps), the 260 beats it by 20-30% wind drift and 15% drop at 1000 yards, with less recoil. 260 is merely a 308 case necked down to 6.5mm, so it is short-action, and because it shares case dimensions, it fits in every DBM that works with 308.
The downside of 260--
No "appropriate" long-range factory ammo is CURRENTLY available. By appropriate, I mean high-BC match bullets in the 130-142gr range. Black Hills is supposed to have some available shortly.
Good brass is another problem. Remington brass in this caliber has been highly variable. Many shooters get better results necking up Lapua 243 brass, or using Winchester or LC 308 and necking it down. These "forming" options are generally labor intensive to prep the brass the first time.
Barrel life will be good, but 40-60% of 308's barrel life, so you lose a bit there.
AR-10 rifles are more finicky for accuracy than bolt rifles, in terms of what loads they "like" and 260 is no exception here. The AR-10 in 260 probably won't be able to get the velocity you can get from a bolt gun.
hope this helps
Zak
ETA- I believe the 2nd place team at the 2006 PRTC used an AR10 in 260.
Alpha Sierra
12-05-06, 19:12
Unless you are striving for BR accuracy, Remington brass is perfectly fine. MOA accuracy at 600 yards from sling supported prone with irons is good enough for me.
That said, if you want better, the easy way is to neck up Lapua 243 with a Sinclair 6 mm - 6.5 mm expander die.
To clarify, the problems we have had here were not accuracy as much as being way too soft.
Alpha Sierra
12-05-06, 20:29
To clarify, the problems we have had here were not accuracy as much as being way too soft.
Interesting. Being primarily a HP service rifle shooter, the bulk of my reloading is 5.56 LC brass. But I also have a 260 Rem match rifle that I shoot several times a year. The most firings I have on a batch of brass is three (I think) and primer pockets are still plenty tight.
Maybe you guys are using stiffer loads? I am running a Lapua Scenar 139 over 42.5 grains of H4350.
Both myself and another experienced reloader saw this in two different rifles with a lot of different loads. When I was using R-P, with a reasonably mild load, it was leaving smoke rings around 50% of the primers (the primers looked OK.) Primer pockets comparatively loose before first firing, etc.
My current load is 40.7gr H4350 with a 139gr Scenar, in the Lapua brass. The R-P load was a bit more because it was thinner brass, but still less than 42.5gr.
Alpha Sierra
12-05-06, 21:37
If it matters, I am using Fed 210M primers. I have found that both the 205 and 210 match primers seem to seal tighter.
Honestly, I have not seen those kinds of pressures/weaknesses in my brass. I will keep an eye on it, though.
The reason I say that it's variable and not that it sucks across the board is that a couple other guys have other batches of R-P .260 that seem to be OK.
I started with 210M's, but got significantly better accuracy with the BR2 in 260 and H4350.
Alpha Sierra
12-06-06, 06:41
I started with 210M's, but got significantly better accuracy with the BR2 in 260 and H4350.
You're not the first to tell me that. I just bought a brick of Feds, but trying a box of BR2s is definitely in the cards. Might be a good winter project.
Well where to begin, first i bought a 6.8mm upper and ammo was not available for around 8 months. Then when ammo was finally available it did not meet the performance standards originally reported, then we discovered that most ammo would not in fact actually feed from standard 5.56mm magazines despite claims that it would.
03humpalot, you might wish to check your facts. The 6.8 mm has demonstrated outstanding terminal ballistic performance assessment, exceeding the specified requirements in every government test that has been conducted. If you are discussing external ballistics, then the only "performance standard" specified in the original military requirements was for the 6.8 mm velocity to exceed that of an AK47 firing M43 by 200 fps--it does. The 6.8 mm was never required to feed in 5.56 mm magazines; the only magazine requirement was that 6.8 mm magazines had to fit into 5.56 mm issue mag pouches. 6.8 mm mags meet this requirement.
Exactly what official requirements or government performance standards has the 6.8 mm failed to meet?
Zak,
Have you played with 7mm-08? It is a nice cartridge.
03humpalot
12-07-06, 09:43
03humpalot, you might wish to check your facts. The 6.8 mm has demonstrated outstanding terminal ballistic performance assessment, exceeding the specified requirements in every government test that has been conducted. If you are discussing external ballistics, then the only "performance standard" specified in the original military requirements was for the 6.8 mm velocity to exceed that of an AK47 firing M43 by 200 fps--it does. The 6.8 mm was never required to feed in 5.56 mm magazines; the only magazine requirement was that 6.8 mm magazines had to fit into 5.56 mm issue mag pouches. 6.8 mm mags meet this requirement.
Doc,
i am well aware of how the 6.8mm has been performing in the field. I was speaking strictly about external ballistics and how factory loaded ammunition from 4 different manufacturers has not come close to what the manufacturers have claimed (in my Rifle).
I guess i misunderstood the requirement on the magazine interchangeability but i stand by my statement. I also will continue to use 6.8mm despite my issues with it thus far.
Sorry for the thread hijack
Zak,
Have you played with 7mm-08? It is a nice cartridge.
I have not. Running the numbers for 7-08, we didn't think you could get enough velocity with the high-BC 7mm bullets (e.g. 168gr up) out of the small case, hence we went to 260.
I have not. Running the numbers for 7-08, we didn't think you could get enough velocity with the high-BC 7mm bullets (e.g. 168gr up) out of the small case, hence we went to 260.
Another reason why I love Savage Rifles, as I can do most of the work myself. What about long throating the 7-08 barrel and using a LA as a host? You are not bound by the SA magazine to keep COAL 2.800"..............Really do not see why people shy away from LA receivers for cartridges that were originally used in them.
I think we've strayed from calibers for the AR10..
With regard to long-seating 7-08, I ran some numbers in QuickLoad. For the 168 Berger VLD at 2.800 (26" bbl, 60kpsi max, 104% case fill), the average of the top 3 powders was about 2730. When I increased the OAL to 3.000", it reported an increase of only 40fps.
With a BC of 0.643, that certainly blows the 308 out of the water, even at 2.800", but it's a little slow compared to the 260, and significantly worse than you can get in LA calibers (6.5-284, 6.5-06, 7RM, etc).
A few hundredths of a BC point (e.g. 0.61 vs. 0.64) isn't enough to make up for a 100fps speed-up in muzzle velocity. They'll be wthin 1" of wind at 1000 yards and the faster/lower-BC one will drop just under a half a mil less.
_Bullet_ _BC_ _MV_ 0 200 400 600 800 1000 | YARDS
338 250 0.640 3000 > 0.00 0.30 1.40 2.80 4.30 6.10 | drop (Qt mil)
7RM 168 0.643 2950 > 0.00 0.30 1.50 2.90 4.50 6.30 | drop (Qt mil)
7-08 0.643 2730 > 0.00 0.40 1.80 3.50 5.40 7.50 | drop (Qt mil)
139 LAP 0.615 2820 > 0.00 0.40 1.70 3.20 5.00 7.10 | drop (Qt mil)
308 155 0.508 2830 > 0.00 0.40 1.70 3.40 5.40 7.70 | drop (Qt mil)
338 250 0.640 3000 > 0.00 1.37 5.72 13.39 24.80 40.41 | wind (inches)
7RM 168 0.643 2950 > 0.00 1.41 5.85 13.69 25.33 41.27 | wind (inches)
7-08 0.643 2730 > 0.00 1.57 6.54 15.32 28.39 46.31 | wind (inches)
139 LAP 0.615 2820 > 0.00 1.57 6.55 15.37 28.52 46.60 | wind (inches)
308 155 0.508 2830 > 0.00 1.91 8.03 19.01 35.66 58.95 | wind (inches)
I think we've strayed from calibers for the AR10..
With regard to long-seating 7-08, I ran some numbers in QuickLoad. For the 168 Berger VLD at 2.800 (26" bbl, 60kpsi max, 104% case fill), the average of the top 3 powders was about 2730. When I increased the OAL to 3.000", it reported an increase of only 40fps.
With a BC of 0.643, that certainly blows the 308 out of the water, even at 2.800", but it's a little slow compared to the 260, and significantly worse than you can get in LA calibers (6.5-284, 6.5-06, 7RM, etc).
A few hundredths of a BC point (e.g. 0.61 vs. 0.64) isn't enough to make up for a 100fps speed-up in muzzle velocity. They'll be wthin 1" of wind at 1000 yards and the faster/lower-BC one will drop just under a half a mil less.
_Bullet_ _BC_ _MV_ 0 200 400 600 800 1000 | YARDS
338 250 0.640 3000 > 0.00 0.30 1.40 2.80 4.30 6.10 | drop (Qt mil)
7RM 168 0.643 2950 > 0.00 0.30 1.50 2.90 4.50 6.30 | drop (Qt mil)
7-08 0.643 2730 > 0.00 0.40 1.80 3.50 5.40 7.50 | drop (Qt mil)
139 LAP 0.615 2820 > 0.00 0.40 1.70 3.20 5.00 7.10 | drop (Qt mil)
308 155 0.508 2830 > 0.00 0.40 1.70 3.40 5.40 7.70 | drop (Qt mil)
338 250 0.640 3000 > 0.00 1.37 5.72 13.39 24.80 40.41 | wind (inches)
7RM 168 0.643 2950 > 0.00 1.41 5.85 13.69 25.33 41.27 | wind (inches)
7-08 0.643 2730 > 0.00 1.57 6.54 15.32 28.39 46.31 | wind (inches)
139 LAP 0.615 2820 > 0.00 1.57 6.55 15.37 28.52 46.60 | wind (inches)
308 155 0.508 2830 > 0.00 1.91 8.03 19.01 35.66 58.95 | wind (inches)
Zak, thanks for the QL data. QL is the "what if of what ifs?" Neurotic's worst nightmare.
This topic strayed quite abit from the 260 and the AR10, but there is still a bunch of good info in it. I would love to do an AR10 in 260 Remington, so where can I look to have a barrel made? Could try calling JN Rifleworks again......or I may contact DPMS and special order one of their uppers. I could all ways cannibalized it for the barrel.
Alpha Sierra
12-09-06, 07:50
I would love to do an AR10 in 260 Remington, so where can I look to have a barrel made?
I would suggest contacting John Holliger of White Oak Precision (http://www.whiteoakprecision.com)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.