I've always heard that you can knock off around 50 fps. per inch of barrel difference when looking at published velocity vs. actual.

I'm looking at picking up a Ruger compact in .260 Rem for my girlfriend. With the short 18 inch tube, I'm wondering how much velocity I'll really be able to get with 140 grain bullets. If the above holds true, the velocity would be down in the 2400 fps range.

Anyone have any actual experience with this cartridge and barrel length combination?

Pete

Pete, in a 1896 swede, I lost 100fps from my 24" sporter vs my 21" gun, a twin of the 260.

From 24 to 21 I saw approx. 33fps loss.

Maybe someone can post speeds but I think you will/should get 2500-2550 w/140s as my 22" gets nigh 2700.

BTW, is that an 18" or a 16.5? I was figuring 16.5.

I REALLY think 6.5mms should be used in 22-24" bbls, but the compact will do fine for closer shots, but they will be loud....ER.

If for deer, I'd load a 120 Ballistic tip around 2700+ and have a round giving good expansion and penetration. But a standard 140 will work, just not long range.

What is your game and range?

Pete

The shorter barreled rifle will be a lot easier for her to handle.

Heck they are a lot easier for Me to handle.
My wife has used a 243 and a 308 with 18" bbls and I have used 308, 350Rem Mag, and a 375H&H with 18 to 20" bbls quite a bit. They kill just as good as longer bbled rifles, near as I can tell.

They are just as accurate also.

I agree with 6.5BR's results. There is however a critical barrel length which is not linear in velocity gain/loss per barrel-inch. At that point in a short barrel velocity drop can be an order of magnitude. The .260 Remington is an eficient cartridge and should be able to withstand a shorter barrel length.