Shooters Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hello from Scotland~

Why are there no 160 gn RN loads availble for the .260 or even 6.5x55 in American factory ammo ?

When in Europe the little 6.5 has proved its self a Elk/Moose killer when loaded with those long looking 160 gn RN bullets ?

Are the 6.5mm calibres looked on as light game rounds when compared to all your "MAGNUM", "ULTRA MAGNUM" rounds ??


It would appear to have a lot to offer .243 like recoil,noise, yet mammoth killing potential and great accuracy to boot !

Do the throats on the modern rifles allow for those long ungainly looking 160 gn bullets ? Or is it to do with loss of powder capacity in the petite .260 ?

If done of the above are are to blame then surly not "fashion" for if so the full potential of the 6.5 is being wasted.............

Englander
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
827 Posts
I think you can blame the average American hunter for the choice of bullet weights in the 260, the 160gr. bullets just would not offer enough velocity or a flat enough trajectory to be popular. I think also your comments about powder capacity are also important to keep in mind, along with the thought that a premium 140gr. bullet would offer about the same penetration as a plain 160.
Besides we always have the 30-06 for elk, black bear and moose :)
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Another element in the equation is, I believe, the nature of most 6.5x55mm rifles in the States. Most are military surplus used as cheap, knockabout deer rifles. I'd wager many were bought specifically for first-time hunters who may be recoil sensitive. For the vast majority, a 140-grain load is plenty. I also agree that there is a strong dose of Magnumitis running through the question. I really like the standard velocity .264 calibers. I just need to find another clean M96 to replace my long lamented Swede!
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
5,220 Posts
I could be completely wrong, but believe there isn't much interest in the 6.5's because of excellent chamberings in the .25 and 7mm cal.'s. The 260 is sandwiched between a couple of calibers that do what you look for very well and already have a great fan base. The 260 is a half millimeter of the 7mm-08 and not as flat shooting or varmint friendly as the 25's. The 7mm-08 does every thing the 6.5's will in the same size rifles and there are so many bullet choices available in the 7mm cal already. The 7mm-08, 7mm Mauser, 280 Rem and the various 7 Mags already have a good foothold in the industry and do what they do extremely well. If you want something a tad smaller, there are 25's for whatever your wishes are and some pretty dog gone good 6mm's too.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
36,236 Posts
I suspect that the issue is that the .260 is generally chambered in short-action rifles with a magazine box of 2.8" or less.

My 1896 Swede has a mag box of 3.2" or so, and the long 160gr. bullets can be seated out of the powder space, so long as the throat will accomodate them.

The 160gr. RNs aren't much longer than a 140gr. spitzer (if any), but the throat definitely has to be longer for the round nose bullet.

Besides, if a 125gr. or 140gr. Nosler Partition can't do the job, I should probbably be using something else (or prepare to deploy the bayonet)!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
alyeska338 - I think you hit it right on the head! The 6.5's have never been very popular because of the reasons you gave. I have also found that the most popular rounds for hunting were the one's previously used by that country's military. In Europe the 6.5's, 7mm and the 8mm are as popular there for hunting as our 06 and 08's are here. CEJ..
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top