second guessing my caliber choice

[565fitter]

I haven't bought the gun yet but I have scope base and rings. I was torn between the 22-250 or a 223. but after reading more on other short action calibers I am leaning towards the .260 or .243. the rifle will be a remmy 700. I want a long distance gun capable of 1000yrds but more for 600yds. I'm really leaning to the .260 after reading. I reload or at least I have the stuff to do it. I need to just sit down and learn how to do it

[T2C]

.260 Remington will easily get you out to 1,000 yards.

[Failure2Stop]

.260 is a really neat cartridge.
I prefer 7.62 for "real work" due to the plethora of projectiles available, but I am very interested in a .260 for long range fun.

Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

[lunchbox]

I haven't bought the gun yet but I have scope base and rings. I was torn between the 22-250 or a 223. but after reading more on other short action calibers I am leaning towards the .260 or .243. the rifle will be a remmy 700. I want a long distance gun capable of 1000yrds but more for 600yds. I'm really leaning to the .260 after reading. I reload or at least I have the stuff to do it. I need to just sit down and learn how to do it

If by chance your more of a visual learner http://www.ammosmith.com/ammosmith-c...eo-library.php good forum for learning to reload(good guys) and good loads.. And of course these the tried and true old faithful https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...loading+manual once ya get started, your going to kick your self for any earlier hesitation. Reloading is not hard, just time consuming and tedious.....

[Coal Dragger]

Of the cartridges you have listed the .260 would be the best bet.

Frankly a .223 is a marginal choice for 600 yard work, and a piss poor one for 1000 yards. You simply don't have enough powder capacity to get the bullet up to a speed that is going to give long range performance. Plus .224 diameter bullets don't really have very good ballistic coefficients until you get into the really heavy for caliber offerings of 80gr or over, and then you really eat up powder capacity in a small case.

The .22-250 is an improvement over the .223 in the horsepower department, but there again heavy bullets are going to eat up too much space. Plus good luck finding a factory barrel in .22-250 with a twist rate fast enough for a bullet much heavier than 60gr.

Also worth serious consideration are the 6.5mm Creedmoor, and the 6.5mmX47 Lapua. Both have performance pretty much equivalent to the .260 Remington, although both will offer some advantages to the reloader where brass is concerned. Namely the .260 Remington has a shorter neck than many accuracy nuts would prefer, and the 6.5mm Creedmoor corrects this "problem". One nice thing about the 6.5mm Creedmoor is that Hornady factory loads have the load printed on the box, so you can duplicate them very easily if they shoot well.

[565fitter]

Of the cartridges you have listed the .260 would be the best bet.

Frankly a .223 is a marginal choice for 600 yard work, and a piss poor one for 1000 yards. You simply don't have enough powder capacity to get the bullet up to a speed that is going to give long range performance. Plus .224 diameter bullets don't really have very good ballistic coefficients until you get into the really heavy for caliber offerings of 80gr or over, and then you really eat up powder capacity in a small case.

The .22-250 is an improvement over the .223 in the horsepower department, but there again heavy bullets are going to eat up too much space. Plus good luck finding a factory barrel in .22-250 with a twist rate fast enough for a bullet much heavier than 60gr.

Also worth serious consideration are the 6.5mm Creedmoor, and the 6.5mmX47 Lapua. Both have performance pretty much equivalent to the .260 Remington, although both will offer some advantages to the reloader where brass is concerned. Namely the .260 Remington has a shorter neck than many accuracy nuts would prefer, and the 6.5mm Creedmoor corrects this "problem". One nice thing about the 6.5mm Creedmoor is that Hornady factory loads have the load printed on the box, so you can duplicate them very easily if they shoot well.

ok 6.5 i'm interested. what would I do, buy a 260 and swap out the barrel?

[taliv]

.260 is a really neat cartridge.
I prefer 7.62 for "real work" due to the plethora of projectiles available, but I am very interested in a .260 for long range fun.

Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

i'm way out of my lane when it comes to terminal ballistics discussions. however, if the consensus is "shot placement is more important than bullet selection" and you get more hits with a 260 (they call them cheater cartridges for a reason) i think it's worth pondering for 'real work'.

granted, logistics such as ammo availability, barrel life, etc still heavily favor 308. probably forensic data as well on the LEO side.


i'm just saying, if i miss my wind call at 500 yards by 5 mph, that's 12" with a 308 vs 8" with a 260, both shooting SMKs. using an ipsc for reference, that's a complete miss vs d-zone hit. @ 2.5mph wind est error, that's 6" vs 4" which is C zone vs A zone hits.

again, honestly i don't know. but would a better 308 bullet in the C zone be a better choice than a 140g in the A zone?

[Coal Dragger]

ok 6.5 i'm interested. what would I do, buy a 260 and swap out the barrel?

Well depending on your budget you could just buy an action and have the rifle built.

Alternately if you can find a heavy match barrel equipped .260 just buy it and shoot! I was just throwing out some other options.

For that matter unless you're hell bent on a short action you could go 6.5mmX284 Norma and gain 250+fps over a .260.

[Gramps]

Not really sure what your purpose for the gun is. I started down the target load path for accuracy, and thought I researched out some good stuff, then talked to very confident smith/shooter, and he knew what I wanted to do, and knew my income. He ended up telling me that for what I wanted, that I was going to need everything custom built, to use some of the reloading tools I had already purchased, and that I was possibly going down a road I really shouldn't. Eventually I understood what he was talking about. If you are into 1000yd comp, check out what is being used for this in your area, within your budget. Some used to use 22ppc, 6mmbr, 308, and 300's. I've been out of that for quite some time now.

[jpipes]

Frankly a .223 is a marginal choice for 600 yard work, and a piss poor one for 1000 yards. You simply don't have enough powder capacity to get the bullet up to a speed that is going to give long range performance. Plus .224 diameter bullets don't really have very good ballistic coefficients until you get into the really heavy for caliber offerings of 80gr or over, and then you really eat up powder capacity in a small case.

Do you have experience with a 223 bolt gun at distance?

The 223 is the perfect cartridge for 600 and in, especially with the heavies (75+). You get less recoil, less cost to load, and performance equal (if not better) than most .30 cal offerings. This hold especially true when you have a properly set-up long range .223. I am sending a berger 82 BTHP, pointed, at 2900, which keeps the bullet supersonic to 1200 yards. Inside of 800, I'll take that over just about everything else.

At 800, that combo is 5.9 mils/1.7 mils...at 1000 I am 8.7/2.3. All assuming a 1500 DA and a 10mph 3:00 wind. In comparison, my 308 sending 155 scenars at 2925 is 5.9/1.7 and 8.8/2.3. In other words, I am getting 308 palma-ish load performance in my 223 with half the powder, half the recoil, and half the bullet cost. I also have double (if not more) the barrel life of the 22-250 that people seem to think is superior.

The two downsides are 1) there isn't a lot of energy downrange with the 82gr bullets, so spotting impacts and misses requires you to be johnny on the spot at distance, and 2) it helps to point the bullet, which is another step in the reloading process.

The positives far outweigh the negatives, and the numbers don't lie. A properly set-up 223 is an excellent 1000 yard gun. Bullet/powder technology has come such a long way, and we aren't stuck shooting m193 anymore.