Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
.260 vs 6.5 Creedmore
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="nicholasjohn" data-source="post: 2159922" data-attributes="member: 109113"><p>I don't think Remington messed up at all - they just didn't do it as well as Hornady did it with the newer cartridge. They also didn't have as much to work with at the time. The 260 came to the market in a different day & age, and it was nothing more than a slight modification of an existing design. They necked down the 7-08, with no other changes, to accept a bullet that was of a less than popular diameter. It was their attempt to introduce a compromise between the 270 Winchester and their own 25-06, but in a short action rifle. If they had known what guys were going to want to do with it a couple of decades later, things might have been different from the beginning. </p><p></p><p>This whole long-range thing wasn't anything like what it is today back when they designed the 260. In those days, 300 yards was a long shot at a deer for most hunters, and VLD bullets were not yet all the rage. Hunters sighted in 3" high at a hundred yards and shot mostly flat-based bullets,. Scopes didn't have repeatable adjustments like they do today, bullets weren't as well balanced, and barrels weren't as accurate. All these things have improved enormously, and Hornady improved the cartridge to get it caught up with the rest of the program. This was a very smart move, and it was well thought out. So was their marketing program, which is an essential ingredient. The marketing is about the only thing that Remington actually screwed up, and it seems that they are famous for that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="nicholasjohn, post: 2159922, member: 109113"] I don't think Remington messed up at all - they just didn't do it as well as Hornady did it with the newer cartridge. They also didn't have as much to work with at the time. The 260 came to the market in a different day & age, and it was nothing more than a slight modification of an existing design. They necked down the 7-08, with no other changes, to accept a bullet that was of a less than popular diameter. It was their attempt to introduce a compromise between the 270 Winchester and their own 25-06, but in a short action rifle. If they had known what guys were going to want to do with it a couple of decades later, things might have been different from the beginning. This whole long-range thing wasn't anything like what it is today back when they designed the 260. In those days, 300 yards was a long shot at a deer for most hunters, and VLD bullets were not yet all the rage. Hunters sighted in 3" high at a hundred yards and shot mostly flat-based bullets,. Scopes didn't have repeatable adjustments like they do today, bullets weren't as well balanced, and barrels weren't as accurate. All these things have improved enormously, and Hornady improved the cartridge to get it caught up with the rest of the program. This was a very smart move, and it was well thought out. So was their marketing program, which is an essential ingredient. The marketing is about the only thing that Remington actually screwed up, and it seems that they are famous for that. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
.260 vs 6.5 Creedmore
Top