For all of its accomplishments and its popularity in benchrest and long range shooting, why in the world would Remington go to the trouble to develope a cartridge, conduct market studies and then absolutely let the damn thing pretty much die a slow death? I'm speaking of the .260 Remington and by all accounts, Remington seems to be deadset on letting it dissappear. I'm sure with the parant case that the R & D wasn't too awefully expensive but I'd still guess they had a pretty good amount of time and money tied up in this round. Just makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. Just curious.

My only reply is, if it doesn't sell, it doesn't sell. Let it die rather than putting more marketing $$$$ into something with no return. Don't get me wrong, I love the 260, but there are just not enough of us to matter.

I would rather ask, why don't they start making ammo for the 6.5-284 that is more popular. They certainly could compete with the outrageous prices of Hornady, Nosler and Lapua.

I hear what your saying, but how do they expect to sell something if they dont advertise for it? Cant sell it if no one knows about it.

Remingon didn't have to put THAT much work into the 260 Rem. The 6.5-08 has been a wildcat for many, many moons. And actually, A-Square sent specs to SAAMI a year or two before Remington did. All Rem did was slap their name on something and ruin it. IMO, if it says Remington in the name and its not a 7mm or a bench rest/varmin round....its doomed.

It is truely a damn shame for Remington to LET the 260 die. Now days if the name is not Ultra, or Magnum, or Short mag etc, it does not sell. The 260 has to be one of the best all around ctgs ever marketed. It just did not sell. Remington, Marlin, DPMS, all now being owned by a French holding company, Cerberus, that knows nothing about the American hunter does not help.

Remington isn't letting the .260 die! Its short life duration was determined prior to its release. It brought NOTHING to an already over crowded market; short moderate sales , then dwindling attention leading to days of nostalgia. Like Remingto we probably should just move on. roger

It brought alot to the table .. A true combination round . With lighter fmjbt or mono metal sptz bt ,at a moderate velocity it is good for fur , with 140 gr TSX or Swift it will work well on Moose and Caribou , ect .. Better for target than the 7/08 ...... An excellent round ..I wish Ruger brought it out in the Target Varmint rifle ... As is it is right at home also in the Ruger Compact ..Which is a perfect , ready made Sheep rifle ........................

quote:

Originally posted by larrys:
My only reply is, if it doesn't sell, it doesn't sell. Let it die rather than putting more marketing $$$$ into something with no return. Don't get me wrong, I love the 260, but there are just not enough of us to matter.

I'm just to the point of bench testing my .260 Remington.....a M-70 featherweight....they didn't make it so I had to build it myself....

Like Larrys says...if it don't sell.....etc.

If they don't make it.....do it yourself.

IMO it's one of the finest deer rounds ever.

As I recall, Remington didn't develop this cartridge at all. Jim Carmichael developed it and wrote about it and raved about it and the rest is history. The 260 was destined to die because it didn't do anything that a 6.5 x 55 already did and had been doing quite well around the world for a long time. The 260 will have a lot of company in a few years. Too much duplication of effort out there.

My thoughts on this are very simple. The 6.5x55 Swede Mauser has been around for more than 100 years. Of course it was standardized at 45K CUP, the standard of the day. Great rep. Dozen other rounds. 6.5 Iti (with which Oswald shot Kennedy...) Mannlicher, Dutch, etc...

Remington thought they could "steal this thunder" with a .308 based 6.5 standardized at 55K CUP like the post 1950 cartridges (or the .270 WCF for that matter).

Didn't work. Those shooters using the various 6.5's have found them to be reliable and no reason to abandon them for the flash of a "new" round... (6.5/ 08 new? ha, ha, ha.)

So now Remington is cutting its losses and looking for another play, probably equally bone headed. Talked to a man at Mossberg many years past. Had worked for Remington. Remington ordered computer controlled machine tools and fired all their machinists BEFORE they realized that you have to have a few machinists to "set up" the computer controlled machines... Real chore to hire a machinist after treating the former employees that way... Oh well. Happy New Year.

sunk cost.

Actually, what IS tragic is how they marketed the 35 Whelen. Put a stinking 1:16" twist so heavier, better BC bullets could not be used. I was soooooo mad, I bought a CZ FS in 9,3x62 and had a better cartridge and rifle for the same $$$.

Rich
Buff Killer

quote:

Originally posted by airgun1:
As I recall, Remington didn't develop this cartridge at all. Jim Carmichael developed it and wrote about it and raved about it and the rest is history. The 260 was destined to die because it didn't do anything that a 6.5 x 55 already did and had been doing quite well around the world for a long time. The 260 will have a lot of company in a few years. Too much duplication of effort out there.

X 2 roger

I wish Hornady and Ruger would take it over ....The problem is deer hunters tend to be so stupid .....If they think there is a mole hill of difference between the 260 and the 270 ,or 7-08 280 ECT ECT ECT add nausium ......for killing a deer , they are out to lunch .. The nice thing about the 260 is it will do what a 243 will and what a 30-06 will Just wasn,t marketed correctly ............ and it wasn,t picked up by the other companies very well .........

It's a far better dual purpose round than the 243 but they don't market it as such. Rem. has always been lacking in the marketing dept. Look at the 280 or the SAUM. Thye just have no idea how to push or support a cartridge.

The 260 Remington is a valuable and sensible cartridge. I don't think Remington did enough to make the "non-expert" hunting population aware of it. Maybe the name? The 7mm-08 has been fine.

Well personally I am glad they brought it out.. I am a handloader.. I can reform brass easily.. I have plenty of die stuff for it...

and I am glad that we can get aftermarket barrels chambered in all sorts of stuff..

from the manufacturers point, the average customer is Joe Walmart or Joe Sportsmans Warehouse or Joe Cabelas..

regardless with what they come out with.. I am sure 243, 270, 308 and 30/06 make up 50% of all of their sales... 223 makes a big percentage after that, followed by the 22.250, 300 Win Mag and the 7 Rem Mag... all those combined I bet are 85 % of their bread and butter...

all these 'new' ideas are jocking for that 15% of the market share each year...

I am sure their marketing savvy is basically sling crap on the wall and see what sticks...aimed at that 15% of the annual market..

oh forgot to add 30/30s.. well they just go on and on...those will probably always be around..

quote:

why in the world would Remington go to the trouble to develope a cartridge

They didn't. They only commercialized it. Jim Carmichel should not be credited with the development of the round, either. It was being used years before he decided to take the 6.5 x .308 and slap the "Panther" moniker on it.

Part of the reason that Rem seems to want to abandon it is that the factory ammo just does not sell. But that was as predictable as the sun appearing in the east tomorrow morning. The .260 is primarily a reloader's cartridge -- always has been and always will be.

I've shot the 6.5x .308 for years and even "had" to have a 700 VLS when it first appeared in .260. I simply don't use factory ammo, but when I heard of Rem's 140 being loaded so anemically, I had to find out for myself if it was true.

Well, the 140s clocked a miserable sub-2500 fps from the 26" barrel.

So Remington certainly didn't help itself in that arena, either.

But as good as the .260 is as a medium game round, it does not offer anything that the 6.5x55 (not to mention a host of other cartridges) already offered.

Nonetheless, the .260 will not die. They are plenty of dedicated shooters who are using and will continue to use it -- no matter what Remington does.

quote:

IMO, if it says Remington in the name and its not a 7mm or a bench rest/varmin round....its doomed.

Errm? The 280 Remington? Another fine cartridge - better more flexible than the 270 WCF - that Remington don't seem to be bothered with enough to produce in a CDL this year.

The 260 Remington was becoming quite popular in Great Britain too. Personally? I guess it struggled against the 6.5x55 here which is very popular and, of course, available in many European factory rifles off the shelf.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:

quote:

why in the world would Remington go to the trouble to develope a cartridge

They didn't. They only commercialized it. Jim Carmichel should not be credited with the development of the round, either. It was being used years before he decided to take the 6.5 x .308 and slap the "Panther" moniker on it.


Nonetheless, the .260 will not die. There are plenty of dedicated shooters who are using and will continue to use it -- no matter what Remington does.

Senor Tomek speaks the truth on both counts. For a bit of money Senor Carmichal lent his name and position to the cartridge, and "introduced" it at the SHOT Show. But he did NOT develop the cartridge. It was around for many years as the 6.5/08, and was tried for metallic silhouette, and other uses.

Those of us who like the 6.5s, but prefer easy to get full-diameter brass (such as the .308 once-fired stuff as well as new) will continue to use it whether Remington sticks their nose in the tent again or not.

They did the same damn thing to the 6mm mag and the 350mag.

chamber it it rifles with limited mag length, throat the chambers for seating heavy bullets up the the ogive which limits powder capacity and then wonder why people complain they can't get the speed out of it the factory claims.

The .260 needs to be in a 57mm or long action for no other reason that to get a 140 grain bullet up and out of the case and into the neck to make room for more powder.

The .280 has the same problem. Long high BC bullets need room in the action.

I wonder if the 6mm. Remington is going to be the next small bore cartridge out the door after the .260 Remington.

Cerberus Capital Management owns Remington, Marlin, Bushmaster, DPMS Panther Arms and Cobb Manufacturing. They seem to be more interested in maximizing profits than in supporting cartridges that aren't highly popular. I am guessing that at some time during this recession, they will cease to support a number of the old calibers they launched in times gone by.

never looked real closely at the .260 as i had a 6.5x 57 improved when remington brought it out it out.
that said, i do like the 6.5's, but i don't think general "deer hunting" public knows much about them, that hurts popularity and with all the craziness about the short mags lately, i don't think it got a decent chance.... maybe call it poor timing on remington's part.
it maybe looks like it will go the route of the roberts back when it first appeared in a too short magazined action. maybe remington sees this and will bring it back called something else (like they did the .280), in the std. length action, where it belongs.
it's in a tough class of cartridges.... the so-called "ideal deer cartridge" arena. and then with all the yahoos thinking they need one of the short mags to shoot bambi, it just hasen't attracted the numbers...kind of a shame.

interesting thread....right now I'm closing in on three project builds.....
.260 Remington
6mm Remington
.280 Remington

and mostly because they are very good rounds and not available many places

Vapp,

I have barrels on order for the 260, for two rifles and the 7/08 for one rifle...

the 7/08 is a heavy barrel for a Savage 12 BVSS,

the 260s, one is a varmint weight barrel at 26 inches, for a Model 70....

and the other is for a sporter weight 24 inch barrel for a Model 70...

CJ, agreed with all, and I beat my head against the booth wall 2 years ago, hear in Orlando with SEVERAL REM execs who all have their heads and ego up their ..Z's. REM is ONE booth I have not and will not go into at this show.

Ammo sales, true, nothing to do with interest, but SHOOTERS in the know, roll their own, and ammo is where mfg. make money. NOTHING wrong with round, save good quality brass (and Lapua refuses to mfg. for now per Lapua SHOT SHOW info this week) and more ammo/rifles.

I'll continue using it, and the Swede and for naysayers, it OFFERS the SHORT action option for those like me who'd rather one, just because. I still love my 55 in K1A. BOTH shoot equally well, near 1/2MOA for it and my Sako 75 260 using 130 abonds.

Noz is making several 260 ammo offerings, and Fed will even have Barnes 120 grain.

Jim C, correct never developed the round and I don't know the details, but hope Asquare legal responded to getting a raw deal after applying for Saami.

MileHigh, partially correct. If it says Rem, and Varmint, WHY the heck did a 22BR and 6BR never come out in the Varmint series, and the 22/6/7 BR rounds come out in the M7s? The 6 and 7BR in a repeater model 7 would be ideal for women/children, but a 243 with quality bullets, and the 260 will do fine, just more bark and bite, less accuracy and bore life.

Yep, Rem is run by investors who know nothing IMHO about what we talk about here.

6.5BR is correct. Remington has let their prices go up while their quality has declined. They have been trading on the "Remington" name for several years and it has caught up to them. They are not the same company they were. The CDLs are very nice rifles but why in the world would they even put their name on that model 770. That should have had Hi-Point on it.

quote:

Originally posted by Rusty Marlin:
They did the same damn thing to the 6mm mag and the 350mag.

chamber it it rifles with limited mag length, throat the chambers for seating heavy bullets up the the ogive which limits powder capacity and then wonder why people complain they can't get the speed out of it the factory claims.

The .260 needs to be in a 57mm or long action for no other reason that to get a 140 grain bullet up and out of the case and into the neck to make room for more powder.

The .280 has the same problem. Long high BC bullets need room in the action.

+1, X2 roger

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
Those of us who like the 6.5s, but prefer easy to get full-diameter brass (such as the .308 once-fired stuff as well as new) will continue to use it whether Remington sticks their nose in the tent again or not.

What happened to the gal that owns the still? I'm curious what her views are on the subject. How can I reach her? roger

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:

quote:

IMO, if it says Remington in the name and its not a 7mm or a bench rest/varmin round....its doomed.

Errm? The 280 Remington? Another fine cartridge - better more flexible than the 270 WCF - that Remington don't seem to be bothered with enough to produce in a CDL this year.

The 260 Remington was becoming quite popular in Great Britain too. Personally? I guess it struggled against the 6.5x55 here which is very popular and, of course, available in many European factory rifles off the shelf.

The 280 is a 7mm lol I meant the caliber, not just the name. And of course we have to remember that for a short period of time Rem thought it was a good idea to call the 280 Rem the 7mm Rem Express (???????dumb idea!!)

I'm a fan of the 280 as well, having one custom built.

But lets face it, the biggest and most popular Remington named cartridges are the 7mm Rem Mag and the 7mm-08 Remington. There is also the 7mm STW and 7mm RUM. And you have the 222 and 223 Rem's. Most everything else wit the Rem name on it is either something that flopped next to Winchester rounds, or they're sort of under appreciated rounds that usually only handloaders and custom rifles are built on. Such as the 6mm Rem, 6.5 Rem Mag, 260 Rem, 7 RSAUM, 300 RUM/SAUM, 8mm Rem Mag, 338 RUM, 375 RUM and 416 Rem Mag. There are others, but I can't think of them off the top of my head.

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
What happened to the gal that owns the still? I'm curious what her views are on the subject. How can I reach her? roger

She made him licker all night long!

It's the "Curse of the 6.5's".

264 Win Mag
6.5 Rem Mag
260 Rem
6.5 x 55 (Now, sadly, just because it's not "cool")

All chamberings of the 6.5 bore that have FLOPPED commercially.

Last I looked the 6m/m Remington was alive and well. Popular it ain't, but it's still kickin' ass and taking names wherever serious varmint hunters can be found.

Those that blame Remington's marketing are 1/2 right, but don't forget the guns said cartridges originally came in. How many fence post 721s are going to sell when compared to Winchester's model 70? Had the 700 not been an accurate, easily modified rifle, Remington would have been down the proverbial tube decades ago.
FWIW, I think the 22-250 and 338 RUM are the best things since sliced bread.

Well if it doesn't sell why keep putting money into it. Thats the only reason that I can see.

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Remington isn't letting the .260 die! Its short life duration was determined prior to its release. It brought NOTHING to an already over crowded market; short moderate sales , then dwindling attention leading to days of nostalgia. Like Remingto we probably should just move on. roger

In my opinion the 260 rem did the same thing for 6.5x55 that .450 marlin did for 45/70 in that is simply showed people just how good the original could be. Thus the new cartridge was quickly forgotten.

In MHO the only reason the 260Rem hasn't gained the popularity it should generate is because the manufacturers cursed it to a slow death with too slow of rate of twist. I was in the market for a rifle for my daughter and wanted to go with the 260 but with the rate of twist the factory rifles I knew it wouldn't give the kind of accuracy I wanted with the heavier bullets such as 140 grian. I went with the 7mm08 instead. Someday I may rebarrel a short action for a 260 but will opt for the 1/8" twist as I really like the cartridge.

quote:

Originally posted by Luckyducker:
Someday I may rebarrel a short action for a 260 but will opt for the 1/8" twist as I really like the cartridge.

Heavy bullets? Long magazine-deep throat? 7 X 57 ???? roger

quote:

Originally posted by Luckyducker:
I was in the market for a rifle for my daughter and wanted to go with the 260 but with the rate of twist the factory rifles I knew it wouldn't give the kind of accuracy I wanted with the heavier bullets such as 140 grain.

Seems the rifling twist is an issue on a rifle by rifle basis. The late and much lamented Slingster made successful use of the classic 160 gr Hornady roundnose softs in his Chingring Scout built on an otherwise box stock Remington Seven with its 1:9 twist. That said, were I building a 260 I'd specify a 1:8 just to take the worry out of playing with 142 gr Matchkings and the various hunting 140s sporting nosecones.

The 260 may die, but it will get to the cemetery after the WSSMs, SAUM, 325 WSM, 450 Marlin, 308 Marlin and their ilk. Lou

quote:

The 260 may die, but it will get to the cemetery after the WSSMs, SAUM, 325 WSM, 450 Marlin, 308 Marlin and their ilk. Lou