6.8 vs 260

[razmuz]

It's going to be interesting to see which of these rounds make the grade in the civilian market.  What are your predictions?

[Ramrod]

Both are/will be commercial failures. The .260, while an excellent round, has not sold well. The 6.8 is already stillborn. It serves no usefull purpose, and will sell very few rifles. Just my opinion, though. :grin:

[kombi1976]

The .260 to be blunt is an unnecessary cartridge and that's been its problem from the beginning.
While that hasn't been an impediment to other successful cartridges trying to produce a 6.5mm cartridge so similar to the 6.5x55 Swede and market it successfully is almost impossible.
O.k., so the Swede needs a standard length action but there are so many Mauser 96s out there as well as factory sporters it was always going to fail.
The 6.8 has real possibilities........if Remington can get its butt into gear!  :roll:
They really seem determined to design good cartridges then sabotage them through poor marketing.  :?
I think it could replace the 7.62x39 eventually but it probably has to make it's mark in rifles like the M14 first.
There isn't really a mid powered .270 cartridge easily available and the 6.8 SPC could fill this niche.
In fact it would be great as a youth or womens round or simply for light-weight deer and predator hunting, especially since it seems to excel out to 600yds, although you wouldn't want to risk shooting a deer at that distance with the varmint style 115gn bullets Remington are loading for it.
I could seriously see myself buying a lightweight rifle in this cartridge as it hits hard enough for pigs and would be a good roo and fox cartridge too here in Australia.
In fact, it'd fit right between my 25/303 and my 8x57 in the gun locker but I'm not holding my breath.
The ease of being able to be chambered in actions designed for .223 is even better.
If only Remington would put it's money where it's mouth is!  :evil:

[poncaguy]

Well, I plan on getting a 260 Ruger 77  anyway, have a 7mm-08 and a 270 WSM.......

[Leftoverdj]

Kombi, I think you have a pretty good handle on the 6.8 SPC and it might be better suited for your game and conditions than ours. If CZ chambers it in their 527, as is being rumored, it would be pretty close to your .25-303 with same weight bullet, but in a six pound short throw package.

[JohnClif]

The .260 is a great choice for deer hunting, metallic silhouette, and over-the-course high power shooting. It's very accurate, has low recoil, fits in a short action, and is easy on barrels compared to the .243 Winchester. It has a place as the replacement for the obsolete 6.5x55 Swede, and I don't see many people choosing the Swede over the .260 when building a custom rifle, or when picking an off-the-shelf new hunting rifle.

The 6.8 SPC is an attempt to get more lethality at longer range out of the AR-15/M16 platform. Yes, I'm sure it will hit harder than a .223. But, IMO if you need more power than the .223 then you need more power than the 6.8 SPC. I know that many unconventional warfare units in Afghanistan obtained M14s out of storage and used them to telling effect in the fighting there. In the situations where the 7.62x51 proved its mettle, the 6.8 SPC would not have offered advantages over the 5.56mm.

The 6.8 SPC will make a decent medium range deer cartridge, but I don't think it will sell as well as other calibers due to the different head size of the cartridge from the standard .478" rim. The .260 is a better choice from the standpoint of accuracy, velocity, and energy.

I think the .260 will remain and the 6.8 SPC will go away, especially when it isn't adopted by the US military and becomes yet another good but failed idea, like the .276 Pederson.

[Mikey]

I still think the military should have gone with the 260 instead of the 6.8.  Just my opinion.  Mikey.

[Harry Snippe]

I laugh with the remark about the absolete 6.5 Swede. This round maybe has not hit the banner in the states, but is a very accurate hard hitting soft recoil round that is not going to die off .
Never met any one with a model 38 Husqarna 6.5x55 mauser that did not like shooting the rifle. Then also we have a model 96 following.
The 260 round compares  though it will not load the heavy 155/ 160 gr. bullet loaded for the moose, but then who cares.
Did we really need another round based on the 308 cartridge?
Did not the 7MM/08 do that ?
Is the 6.5x55 more of a bolt throw that the 308?  I have used the 308 for a long time , then  bought a 3006.  Never noticed a difference.
The lttle swede fits in the middle . At the range you can shoot all day because of it's low recoil. When it comes to moose hunting - just do your part.

Most Americans rather the 270 , because the 6.5x55 is not an American cartridge. It is not the round but the headstamp at the back of the cartridge that has the fault . Not American.

We are Canadains, and do not have cartridges  with our country's head stamps  anymore . So we do just  merit the rounds for what they are worth/what we can buy componets for , and factor in the cost.
Looks like the likes of the 22, 233 30/30 308 , the 3006, the 300 Mag and the little 6.5  will be around long after I am dead.

[Don Fischer]

I doubt the 260 will go away. It's probally gonna have a life similar to the 280. The 280 just won't die. I think that it has a lot to do with the case. The case for each is so easy to come by that they just don't die, Shoot even the 35 Whelen won't die a what use is it really? It will do nothing the 350 Rem wouldn't do and the 350 fit in a short action. The 350 is dead and the 35 Whelen hangs on. The 284 Win is pretty much dead, the 280 Rem hangs on. It's kinda hard the tool up for old cases that are based on no existing case so they don't get revived. The 6.8, I'm not even sure what that is, I'm guessing a 277 dia. Don't know much about it but don't look for it to go anywhere, The 270 will beat down everything, deserving or not. If it's on a 308 Win or 30-06 case, it may not do real well but it just won't go away.

[kombi1976]

Harry's right.

The .260 is a great choice for deer hunting, metallic silhouette, and over-the-course high power shooting. It's very accurate, has low recoil, fits in a short action, and is easy on barrels compared to the .243 Winchester.

I hate to state the obvious but aside of the short action, you could replace .260 with 6.5x55  in that particular little blurb.
 :roll: The Swede is arguably the most accurate military cartridge chambered for arguably the most accurate military rifle, perhaps with the exception of the Schmitt Rubin 7.5x55.

It has a place as the replacement for the obsolete 6.5x55 Swede, and I don't see many people choosing the Swede over the .260 when building a custom rifle, or when picking an off-the-shelf new hunting rifle.

I'm continually reading about people building customs in 6.5x55.
And if you think it's uncommon for people to be buying a new Swede sporter why do all of the major European companies and many of the US firms still chamber rifles in 6.5x55? :|
There's fewer firms chambering for 260 than for the Swede.

[beemanbeme]

I hope the .260 sticks around.  I just had a rifle rebarreled last year (I used to say the only reason to buy a .243 was to have it rebarrelled to a 7-08. Now I can add, have it rebarrelled to a .260) and was pleasantly surprised with its effectiveness.  
What case is the 6.8 based on?  Also, what sort of bullets are available?  
I have over 1000 .308 cases (and have never owned a .308) and premium 6.5 bullets are readidly available so I guess I don't really have to worry.
I guessing however that the .260 is gonna be like the 7-08.  With no real fanfare nor hype the 7-08 has gradually gained ground until it is considered to be one of the better game cartridges in the US.

[kombi1976]

I guessing however that the .260 is gonna be like the 7-08.  With no real fanfare nor hype the 7-08 has gradually gained ground until it is considered to be one of the better game cartridges in the US.

I'm not sure that the .260 will enjoy the same sort of luck.
Remember, it isn't just competing with the 6.5x55, it's also competing with the 7mm-08.
When the 7mm-08 was introduced its only competition was the 7x57 and number of rifles chambered for 7x57 has fallen drastically over the last few years because of the weak US factory loads for it.
It is actually equal and even superior to 7-08 with decent loads like the Hornady Light Magnums or Sako ammo.
The .260 on the other hand is not only fighting the 6.5x55, the most popular 6.5 round ever and the most popular European round on the market, it is also fighting the 7-08 because of their very similar specs.
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with the .260; it's a good round but there are already 2 cartridges so much like it.
You'll always be able to make .260 brass by forming it from .308 brass but I personally can't see a huge future for it.
Remington for some reason seems to continually either reinvent the wheel or fail to back up their real contenders.
For those guys who don't know what the 6.8 SPC is, it's a 30 Remington case(Remington's rimless answer to the 30-30 & yet another flop) that's shortened and necked down to .270 cal.
As I said before it'll fire a 115gn projectile at 2800fps and is very accurate out to about 600yds.

[Big Paulie]

Dear Guys,

    Stop and pretend for a moment that you do not handload. You only buy factory ammo.  I know that this is really really hard to imagine.  

   Now, if you can keep this strange concept in mind, take another look at the ballistics of the 6.8 Remington SPC.    A .27 caliber bullet, carrying the same amount of foot pounds of energy as the .243 Winchester, but using a 115 grain bullet, with the trajectory of the .308 Winchester.  I think that it would be a wonderful cartridge, a true dual purpose round, capable of dumping even very large deer out to medium ranges!      

    Compared to this,

    1.  The .243 is lame with its 100 grain bullet on heavy weight animals.

     2.  The 7mm-08 only comes in factory loads with a 140 grain bullet (too heavy for varmints).

     3.  The  6.5 Swede only comes in factory loads with a 140 grain bullet (too heavy for varmints.)

      4.   The .257 Roberts, with 115 grain bullet, is a good round on paper, but has serious serious accuracy issues, unless you hand-load or really really have a tuned up rifle.  Is there anywhere that you can buy a new rifle in .257 Roberts that is accurate???

      5.    The 25-06 is a fantastic round, but is really really loud, and way way too much for varmints.

      So, for a rifle where you can have a true dual-purpose round, out to medium ranges, with light recoil, and plenty of power, using Factory Ammo, the  6.8 Remington is the ticket!

       So, of course, Remington will screw this up and kill the cartridge before it even gets a chance.

Just my opinions.

Big Paulie

[Ramrod]

 So, of course, Remington will screw this up and kill the cartridge before it even gets a chance.

They already have. I think you should take a long hard look at the .25 WSSM. Winchester loads 4 bullet weights. Compare this to the 6.8...
http://www.winchester.com/products/catalog/cfrdetail.aspx?symbol=SBST25WSSA&cart=MjUgV1NTTQ==

[Big Paulie]

Ramrod,

  Yes.  The 25 WSSM is very very interesting.  I looked at it long and hard.  Problem is:

    1.  It is a Super Short cartridge, instead of a Short cartridge.  Winchester really really screwed up by doing this.

    2.   It has virtually the same ballistics as the 25-06.  This is just too much power for varmint shooting, except for large varmints at the longest ranges.

     3.  It is way too loud and has way to much muzzle blast for a general purpose varmint rifle.   I know that alot of very good shooters don't care how loud a rifle is, or how much muzzle blast there is.  For me, though, this is the difference between a rifle that is a pleasure to shoot, and one that is miserable to shoot.

     From what I have read and heard, the noise, muzzle blast, recoil and muzzle jump of the 6.8 SPC are all very modest and it is a pleasure to shoot.  I think that this would be great round in the Ruger No. 1 Lighweight Sporter, or in a small CZ mauser.

   Just my opinions.  (Probably moot, since there will probably never be a regular sporting rifle manufactured in 6.8 SPC, and since Remington will probably screw it all up anyway.)

   Also, things are different down here than up in Alaska.  Our varmints won't drag you down in a pack and kill you!!

Best Regards,

Big Paulie

[kombi1976]

From what I have read and heard, the noise, muzzle blast, recoil and muzzle jump of the 6.8 SPC are all very modest and it is a pleasure to shoot.  I think that this would be great round in the Ruger No. 1 Lighweight Sporter, or in a small CZ mauser.

   Just my opinions.  (Probably moot, since there will probably never be a regular sporting rifle manufactured in 6.8 SPC, and since Remington will probably screw it all up anyway.)

Yep, you right on the money.
Apparently anything you can chamber in .223 can be chambered for 6.8 SPC.
On that basis you may even be able to get a good Anschutz small centrefire action and re-chamber it to 6.8 SPC.
This cartridge marketed properly could take the mid-market by storm.
All those guys out there that want a bigger hole in their game but can't handle recoil would go nuts.
But aint that the problem.......we've got Remington marketing it.
They can kill a product quicker than a ADHD toddler at the end of a rainy weekend.  :roll:

[PEPAW]

I have to agree that the 7-08 is going to kill the .260.   Everyone has jumped on the 7 mm bandwagon and that is fine.   The .260 is a perfect TX whitetail rifle, but a little much for varmits and maybe not enough for larger game.  
I really like the .260 and mine has turned into a fairly accurate gun for an off the shelf Model 7 with 20" barrel.
Don't have any experience with the 6.8 yet.

pepaw

[stork]

Well both are doomed becasue the lack of multiple factory loads..  If it weren't for us handloaders neither would be much good to anybody.  We are the ones that will keep a cartidge alive or kill it.  

The 6.8 is marketed as a M-15 round and not many people have the money or the interest in a M-15 to buy one.  In a hunting rifle it would be a great round if and only if you handload.  As a light recoiling fairly flat shooting moderatly powerfull cartridge it shines.

The .260 just has no place.  It is compared to the Swede when it is no match for a Swede.  The swede can be handloaded much faster than the 260 can.  The swede can also handle big heavy bullets better.  The 260 operates at much higher pressures than the swede and that causes the brass to have a much shorter life than the swede.

So unless more factory loads are made for both they are screwed.

[Jim n Iowa]

For my varmint hunting I use every thing I can. While shooting a squinty with 338 is overkill, I still get to shoot my rifle, and squinty won't care. I always said the enjoyment of varmint hunting was using whats available. Coyote hunting here in the winter takes a heavier bullet because of the wind, and a 139 and 140 7mm in a mag works fine.
Jim

[Brithunter]

Hi All,

         Thank you as I got a real laugh out of this thread :-D

     Hmm 6.5x55 obsolote  

     And as for the 6.8mm well lets face it the only reason Winchester has called the .325 WSM a .325 is that if it was called 8mmWSM which is what it really is  :shock:  there are those in the US who wouldn't buy it as it has those two little m's following it.

    Now the 6.8 is not even a new idea chaps, it's a basic re-hash of the old .280 british from 50 odd years ago which the US killed off ( with bribes and backhanders) when trying to foist the 5.56 Aka .223 and the M16 on everyone else in Nato. However thay could not go with a cartridge not designed in the US now could they so they try yet again it re-invent the wheel and what happens is ................ well it sort of fizzles like a damp squib.

     In fact the last original idea remington seem to have comemup with is the old .222 rem which was also ove 50 years ago all else is a re-hash of soem one elses older cartridges.

      Also why is "short action" chanted like some Mantra? also haw can you actually have a short magnum?

    A Magnum is a larger vessel for holding Champagne, so  a shorter smaller case cannot ne considered a Magnum can it?

   Now as for Remington the Company, well I really to feel that unless they pull their heads out from the sand or where ever they have them stuck and really take a look at what rubbish they are pushing out onto the customer, then they will fold and go under, which would be a shame for an old established Co to go that way, and the way of so many other old names of the past.

[Slamfire]

So is anybody looking at the 6.5 Grendel? It would be a better round for the military than the 6.8, more bullet weight better trajectory. It could replace both the 5.56 and 7.62.
I've had a .260 since it was called the .263 Express just rebored my old .243. Those of us who are 6.5mm fans are used to having to handload, no one sells proper ammo for any of the cartridges, except for maybe the rarest one of all the 6.5x57 Mauser.  

[dharvey]

I once had a 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser that shot like a dream, but not being a smith, I never had any hopes of sporterizing it and making it a true hunting rifle. So, I went on to other calibers. Several years later I realize that several American gun manufacturers offered the 6.5x55 and really entertained the thought of ordering one, but lack of a variety of affordable ammo put a damper on it. Within the past few years I bought a Ruger M77 in .260 and am equally impressed with this cartridge. I guess now that I have a real job, the lack of a variety of affordable ammo isn't quite the inhibitor it once was. :roll:  But the simple fact is, I like them both!  Is that possible?? :shock:

My dad said it best when he stated: "If you're raised to hate Fords, you hate Fords!" Fords and Chevys share the same road, why can't the .260 and 6.5x 55? Can't we all just get along?

Oh, and as an answer to the original question, I have no opinion. A lot of good products have become extinct while bad ones never die. We'll just have to wait and see.

[kombi1976]

I once had a 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser that shot like a dream, but not being a smith, I never had any hopes of sporterizing it and making it a true hunting rifle. So, I went on to other calibers. Several years later I realize that several American gun manufacturers offered the 6.5x55 and really entertained the thought of ordering one, but lack of a variety of affordable ammo put a damper on it. Within the past few years I bought a Ruger M77 in .260 and am equally impressed with this cartridge. I guess now that I have a real job, the lack of a variety of affordable ammo isn't quite the inhibitor it once was. :roll:  But the simple fact is, I like them both!  Is that possible?? :shock:

My dad said it best when he stated: "If you're raised to hate Fords, you hate Fords!" Fords and Chevys share the same road, why can't the .260 and 6.5x 55? Can't we all just get along?

Obviously you're a fence sitter, dharvey. :wink:
And the reason the 260 can't co-exist is because it's an evil upstart to a truly classic and superior cartridge........and because I say so. :-D
Besides, we all know that Chevy's don't share the road.
They're evil and wrong.  

[oso45-70]

Gents, Theres always the 6.5 X 284.

[dharvey]

kombi1976 wrote:

Obviously you're a fence sitter, dharvey.  
And the reason the 260 can't co-exist is because it's an evil upstart to a truly classic and superior cartridge........and because I say so.  
Besides, we all know that Chevy's don't share the road.
They're evil and wrong.  

Fence sitting has always been a fun way of watching the action without getting my nose busted

It's interesting to read posts made from people who have a perspective other than American. I, as an American, have been limited to a great degree in what cartridges I have been exposed to. Many of us have only experienced "foreign" cartridges through surplus WWII era rifles. I know I have been guilty of assuming cartridges were basically obsolete only to find that they are alive and well in other parts of the world. That's why I enjoy these types of discussions so much.  :grin:

[Slamfire]

Well both are doomed becasue the lack of multiple factory loads..  If it weren't for us handloaders neither would be much good to anybody.  We are the ones that will keep a cartidge alive or kill it.  

The 6.8 is marketed as a M-15 round and not many people have the money or the interest in a M-15 to buy one.  In a hunting rifle it would be a great round if and only if you handload.  As a light recoiling fairly flat shooting moderatly powerfull cartridge it shines.

The .260 just has no place.  It is compared to the Swede when it is no match for a Swede.  The swede can be handloaded much faster than the 260 can.  The swede can also handle big heavy bullets better.  The 260 operates at much higher pressures than the swede and that causes the brass to have a much shorter life than the swede.

So unless more factory loads are made for both they are screwed.

The .260 has 3 factory leads that I'm aware of. Remington makes 120s and 140s, and Hornady loads 129s. Plenty of cartridges have gotten by with less.
Who cares about the 160 grain loads you say the .260 can't handle?
I'm gettin 7 or 8 loads outa my cases in both of my .260s although I haven't mixed the  lots.
The 6.5x55 is a wonderful cartridge, I had one when you had to handload to get anything other than surplus ammo. It doesn't do anythng that the 6.5x57, 6.5-.257 or .256 Newton don't do.

[Rummer]

My $0.02:

Neither is going to be a great commercial success.  Both will have their own loyal following.

What will really make or break the 6.8mm is whether or not it is adopted by the military.  I'm thinking it probably won't be.  The Army is shopping for a new rifle with which to replace the m16/m4, I think they will stay with the .223 round for logistical reasons.  

The cheapest way to go 6.8 would be to buy new upper receivers to replace the current ones.  This still leaves the expense of replacing/retrofitting all the SAW's in the inventory.  It will probably be cheaper just to buy new 5.56 rifles.  This also keeps the spectre of "NATO interoperability of ammunition" from raising its head.

Personally, I look at the 6.8 and ask "Why?".  It was designed to improve the M16.  I just don't see that big a niche in the sporting market for it, unless you are looking to deer hunt with your AR-15.  It will be about as successful commercially as the 7-30 Waters.

The .260 will be moderately more successful.  There are some folks out their who just love 6.5mm bullets, and for good reason.  These are the guys buying the .260.

 I went to remington's website and compared their .260/120gr with 6.8/115gr and .243/100 grain. http://www.remington.com/ammo/ballistics/centerfire/comp_ballistics_results.asp

 The trajectories are practically identical.  At 200 yards the .260 has 583 ft/lbs more energy than the 6.8 and 451 ft/lbs more than the .243.  

If I were looking for a light recoiling deer/varmint rig, I would get the .260.

Rummer

[RaySendero]

I don't own a rifle in either the 6.8 Rem SPC or the 260 Remington.  But studing the two cartridges - They both seem to have a good design and performance.  But.... Problem is: Military won't adopt the 6.8.  (and neither will Remington!)  Hope the US shooters will adopt the 260 as it really deserves better than Remington is giving it.

[kombi1976]

Who's to know how the 6.8 SPC would fare if it became a popular military round?
Let's keep in mind that the 7.62x39(of which I'm admittedly not a fan) is becoming quite a popular close range brush cartridge for hogs and medium sized deer.
This purely because it has lots of easily available milsurp ammo and it's low recoil.
It's lower performance doesn't seem to worry it's adherrants.
That said I read an article about "blended-metal"(?) bullets which, when used in un-authorised trials in Iraq, were absolutely lethal.
One soldier shot a 5.56 blended-metal bullet into the buttock of an insurgent to stop him and the bullet blew out the entire bowels of the target, killing him on the spot.
I'm not endorsing the use of such bullets in general situations, since they have a similar effect to the good ol' dum-dums, but they certainly have a possible use for high threat firefights.
Of course, choosing the right situation to use them is the rub and give a soldier a lethal load and he'll use it as often as he can, just in terms of self defense and achieving objectives.
BTW, the reason that 5.56 NATO was adopted in the first place was that .308 was heavy to carry spare ammo and it recoiled heavily.
Perhaps .260 Rem recoils less but it certainly wouldn't weigh considerably less than .308.

[cal sibley]

I have 3 older Swedish M96s in 6.5x55, and really like the caliber  When Remington produced the Classic in 6.5x55 I bought one of those also.  It's hard to argue with a caliber that is accurate with everything from 85 to 160grs.  That's quite a range of bullets.  I got my moose with it last year in Northern Ontario using the 160gr. SPSP (round nose to me).  The Classic model has been trouble free save for the odd problem with US made brass.  Recoil is quite moderate.

I see the main problem as a North American aversion to metric calibers in general and with .26 caliber chamberings in particular.  The 6.5x55 has never been a best seller.  Even the .264Win. bit the dust rather rapidly.  I'll muddle along with my 6.5x55s in relative obscurity, but with a wry smile in the process.  Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal