Which rifle in .260 Rem.?

M

Mr. Whimsy

New member
My Dad got a Savage 11THXP for Christmas. He likes it, but I find it only so-so given the hype over Savages on Internet forums. For starters, the stock is chintzy and seems to be made for a much taller person (I'm 5'8" with short arms). Also, the magazine doesn't release smoothly, which drives me nuts. Lastly, there is nothing attractive about the matte finish. The Accu-Trigger is sweet, though.

I am probably stuck with a bolt action using see-thru mounts.

If I could get this caliber in something other than a bolt, then I would. I find most bolt actions very straight-stocked and it can be difficult to get down into my scope. I would also eventually put a youth stock on it or possibly a thumbhole. Savage, in their infinite wisdom, offers both configurations but not in .260. Also, they don't offer a non-package .260 without Accu-stock (not interested). I've considered their Lightweight Hunter - but would be afraid of running into accuracy issues, and of course, I would feel terrible about cutting down the stock to around 13" LOP.

So I'm thinking about a different rifle in this caliber. If you own a .260, please share your experiences. Especially interested in group sizes.

Thank you in advance.
 
First of all I have no experience with the .260 Rem. However I have modified several rifles from the Savage lineup. Most come with a 13.5" LOP and the recoil pad is around 1" thick, so instead of cutting down the stock fit them with a new 1/2" recoil pad and you are right at 13" LOP. That said I'd have no remorse about cutting down a Savage stock, they don't use the highest quality walnut in the first place anyway.

I don't get the see-thru mount comment? I'd say your shooting technique needs a little work, or you shoot some very ill fitting rifles if you are having problems getting the scope to line up. Straight stocks usually are better for eye to scope alignment than a stock that drops a lot to the heel, as those are usually better for shooting iron sights. I find that see-thrus are a terrible mounting system. Remember you bring the scope up to the eye, not the eye down to the scope. You'll be more comfortable and shoot better in the long run.
 
The 11THXP doesn't have the AccuStock (which has mixed reviews, anyway), and the Trophy Hunter is also available in a Youth model... sure he didn't order or get the Youth by mistake?

The .260 has made some real inroads with the long-range crowd along with the other .264 calibers. It's a fantastic round with great external ballistics- what exactly is the complaint? Not a ton of factory ammo for it though- most guys that shoot it, handload.

You're unhappy with the matte finish...why did you/he order it that way, then? It clearly states it's matte in their specs, and I've never seen a hunter want a rifle with a gloss finish that's going to reflect sunlight.

You're unhappy with the cheap stock, and I get that.

But keep in mind, this was a " package" rifle designed to hit a price point including an optic.

We have several Savages, we shoot all of them long-range and they're all capable, one still has the factory barrel.

You most certainly can get a .260 in an AR platform, DPMS makes a decent one at a good price point (well, good luck trying to get one these days though).

But if you're looking for .260 performance in the AR-15 platform, suggest you consider the 6.5 Grendel. My son has one, it's outrageous at 600 yards.

There's no reason that .260 Savage shouldn't shoot minute of angle with the factory barrel in a decent stock.

I just got a Shaw barrel in .260, and will be re-barreling one of our .308 Savages with it next week.
 
Mr. Whimsy said:
My shooting technique does not "need a little work". It is disability-related. Thanks for condescending, though.
Click to expand...

taylorce1 has been around here for a while, and I've rarely (if ever) seen him be condescending. He had no way of knowing your shooting technique was impaired due to a disability. Had you included that in your OP, that would have avoided a bit of confusion on both ends. He was spot-on in his assessment of a normal shooter's scope placement and the shooting technique, notwithstanding your disability.

Now, since that is out of the way... If you can find a Kimber 84M in .260 Rem, they are dandy rifles. They're not made in .260 Rem anymore, so it may be difficult to find, but they are great shooters. They are very light (6.5lbs), which may or may not be a factor considering your disability. They are not cheap though, expect to pay around $800 for a used one in good condition.

The one I had would group 3 cold-bore shots in a Copenhagen lid at 200yds.
 
I've got a Ruger Mk II Compact in 260 and it's just a great rifle, though I don't know if they offer it in that caliber now. LOP is 12 1/2 inches, I'd prefer a full 13 1/2 for me, but I've adapted to the shorter LOP. I may add an extender to get to 13 inches and be happy there. I had an idea to get myself a Tikka T3 Lite Stainless in 260, but found that they didn't offer the rifle in that caliber at present, and the Sako light stainless isn't offered in that caliber now either. So basically you are limited on the rifles that can be had in that caliber unless you like Savage or want to get a more high-dollar rifle. My recommendation would be to find a Remington Model 7 in 260, unless the short barrel is a deal killer. I think maybe you can get that rifle in that caliber, but that's a 'think' and not a 'know'. And then there's the option of buying whatever used short action rifle in a 308 based caliber that strikes your fancy and having it rebarreled with a nifty new high dollar and top level barrel. Personally, I'd go with that last option unless your available funds limit you to Savage.

And if somebody comes back to say that Tikka now has the rifle in 260, I'll be all over that in a heartbeat and I hope I beat you to it.
 
The Remington model 7 sounds like exactly what you need. They offer it in .260 rem and It has a 13 3/8" length of pull. My 5'1" wife shoots one chambered in .243. Its a solid 1 moa rifle as long as you give that little barrel time to cool. The barrel hasnt been floated nor has the action been bedded and it still shoots that good. I may try to tweak it one of these days but she hasnt complained so I havent messed with it. Anything new chambered in .260 rem other than savage or Remington will cost more money and most likely be a longer LOP
 
Last edited:
I've also got a Rem Model 7 in .260 (older model with the 18.5" bbl). It shoots great. My only complaint is that Remington insisted on using a 1 in 9" twist. I wish they had used a 1 in 8 so that I could stabalize heavier bullets. It shoots 140s OK, but a 1 in 8 would shoot them beter.
 
Wow, thanks guys!

I will absolutely check out the Rem. Model 7 - sounds like just the ticket. I was hoping to shoot 140's in it though, so will study on the rifling problem.

Like the previous poster, I immediately thought about the Ruger Compact and the Tikka ... neither of which seem to be chambered in this fantastic round any longer. I missed a used Rem. 7600 in .260 earlier this year. Unfortunately it seems that gun companies have abandoned the .260 now that I have a hankering for one.

If DPMS was selling AR's in .260, the chances of me getting my hands on one now are pretty unlikely.

The Savage Trophy Hunter seems like a great rlfe. I would put up with it in stainless if they made a Youth version, which they don't currently offer. In fact it seems .260 is the only youth-y caliber they don't offer it in.
 
Mr. Whimsy,

Why must you have a .260?

I have had one and many other chamberings over the last 60 years and to a great extent they overlap in effect.

What does not 'overlap' or get easy is if the cartridge is not popular.

Even if you handload it will still not be as easy.

The 260 is sort of in the middle. Too big for varmints and too small for really tough game.

Similar rounds that make more sense and will do the same thing are the 7-08, 7X57, 308 and others.

The 260 is not more accurate or less accurate than other cartridges.

They all have the same potential.

Good luck and keep shooting! :)
 
I went from a .243 to a .260 because I wanted that little extra punch at longer ranges, and the 260 does indeed deliver! I beleive the 260 Rem is just about an ideal deer round with the 120 gr bullets that seem to do a much better job than the 100 gr 6mm. It does this with only a little more recoil than the 243, but seems much less than the other rounds listed on this cartrige platform. Don't discount the SD of the heavier 6.5 bullets either.

Mine is the Rem. 700 CDL Limited edition stainless fluted. I actually want a Model 7 in 260 to woods hunt with. I have never failed to find a few boxes of 260 Rem on the ammo shelf of any of the larger hunting supply stores. If you reload, one pass of a 243 brass through a full length sizer and you are ready to go, 7mm08 and you may have to trim a little!

It is true that many avalable rounds do overlap in their range of effective use, and for game it realy is mostly about bullet placement. Honestly, the only place my 260 has ever shown an edge over the old 243 is on long range shots.

Just mark me down as a .260 Rem. fan!:D
 
Hi Savage99.

Well, you are absolutely right.

It's just that I will be doing all the reloading for my Dad's .260 Savage (the most his shoulder injury allows) and I'll soon be getting in dies/bullets for that. Thus I will have these components on hand anyway and could test the same loads in my own rifle when he tries them in his.

It's silly logic I guess. I just have so many dies in so many calibers - for guns I don't even own anymore - that I almost hate to buy any more if I can avoid it. Unrealistic I suppose, and honestly they aren't that expensive. Brass, on the other hand, now that is hard to come by right now. I already have a BUNCH of new, unused .243 brass I'm gonna neck up to .260 for him.

The 7mm-08 rifles are WAY easier to find... and I have been wanting a .35 rifle of some kind for experimentation...
 
ThundarStick, I couldn't have said it any better myself regarding why I want one of the .260's. I may not find one, and I may end up with something else to use on deer ... but dang if they don't seem like the "Goldilocks" caliber in my mind.
 
Thundarstick, if you like a 120gr. bullet and dont mind a long action, give a .25-06 a try. Little more velocity and flatter trajectory. Deer hate em ;) Ammo is easier to find as well
 
Steve, while a .25-06 is a fine deer killer it does suffer from some deficiencies when compared to a .260 - especially for those of us who like a shorter barrel while sitting in the tree stand. First, the .25-06 is a relatively inefficient powder burner. It requires a pretty long barrel to get its velocity. A .260 slows down relatively little until you drop below an 18" barrel. Second, if you do use a short barrel on a .25-06 you really pay for it with muzzle blast. That is not the case with a .260. Third, the .260 is capable of using a heavier bullet. A 120 grn bullet is heavy for a .25-06 while a .260 commonly comes loaded with 140s and handloaders go even higher than that.

Those 3 characteristics mean that the .260 makes a more "usable" deer rifle for my needs. Now, if I lived in a different part of the country and had different needs then I may very well choose the .25-06.
 
Doyle- I can agree with every bit of that. A rifle with an 18-20" barrel would definitely be better off chambered .260. But if you want to shoot 120gr. bullets, and dont mind a long action and a 24" barrel, you will be pushing that bullet about 300 fps faster than with the .260rem, with about 2" less drop at 300 yards. MV with a 120 gr. .260 is about 2700, while a .25-06 is about 3000. As for deer hunting I wouldnt want anything heavier than 120 grains, some people even elk hunt with a .25-06. Now if you're hunting close range in thick woods all the time, out of a treestand, I could see how the .260 might have a leg up. Otherwise, I have to still give the advantage to the '06. I hunt thick cover sometimes myself, but Im usually carrying my lever-action .35rem.

I will admit that a .260 is probably the best short action caliber to shoot 120's.
 
My 260 is that Ruger compact, with the 16.5 inch barrel, and while I grump about how short the barrel is (and the lower MV), I just really like the light short rifle. It's so darn easy to use and to handle in the woods that I do most of my hunting with it. For the first couple of years I shot the 120 gr Nosler BT's and the rifle appeared just as effective on deer and hogs as my 270 did. Then about the middle of this year I switched to the 100 gr BT's to get a higher MV that would give me a trajectory similar to that of my 270. I wasn't sure that the smaller bullet would work as well, but I'm getting the same results. Bottom line is that everybody talks about shooting heavy bullets in the 260, but you can also shoot the lighter ones and be happy. All that remains of my bullet testing is to shoot a big hog at long range (about 400 or so). If that works out fine (for me..:)), I'll probably stick with the 100 grainer. Time will tell.
 
Now if you're hunting close range in thick woods all the time, out of a treestand,
Click to expand...

Steve, you just covered about 95% of Florida deer hunting.

I see you are up in Boone. Pretty country. My wife is has an on-campus interview at Greensboro next month. If she takes a job up there I'd love to pop over to Boone to share a drink with you.
 
All valuable input. Thank you.

I've hunted with the .25-06 and like it a great deal, but .... it was a long, heavy gun. Honestly I'm looking for something closer to a carbine, and if they .260 doesn't suffer from having a 20" barrel, so much the better. I currently hunt with a 16" barrel, and have nothing but good things to say about it in the woods, although honestly 18" or 20" is probably better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top