25-06

superior bullet flight and less recoil and muzzle blast, shorter lighter gun. Could go on, but I gots to go to work!
 
Jordan Smith said:
LOL, and how exactly does the .260 "beat" the .25-06 as a deer/coyote rifle?
Click to expand...

That's a matter of opinion, not necessarily fact. There is a big laundry list of effective deer cartridges. I've shot deer with all of the .25-06, .270, 7x57, .280, .30-30, .308, .30-06, .303, .348, .44-40, and .50cal ML and they all seemed to fall down about the same, except for the .44-40 which caused the animal to leak to death. I've not used the .260 Rem, but wouldn't mind trying it along with the 6.5 Swedish. It all gets down to bullet placement and shooting at a sensible distance.

The .25-06 is a good deer killer. I bought a new M70 Win 33 years ago and have found it very accurate with all of the 120gr Speer, 120gr Hornady, and 117gr Sierra.
 
I was having a discussion along similar lines of this thread with an old friend and shooter and I asked his opinion on the 260. He asked if I was contemplating buying one and told me he's in the process of thinning out some of the 'occupants' of one of his guns safes and asked "Why would you settle for a second best princess like the 260 when you have first dibs on my model 70 in 264 Winchester Magnum"?? I'm starting to 'feel the need':).
 
Gatehouse said:
Gotta agree with that...

25-06 was good for it's time, and it still works fine, but the .260 beats it in every practical respect as a deer/yote gun. Will work for moose, too!:)
Click to expand...

I'd like to agree with Gatehouse, but I read somewhere that he believes that the 375 Ruger is superior to other 375's. So given that, I can't agree with him. (even though he's probably right) lol
 
todbartell said:
superior bullet flight and less recoil and muzzle blast, shorter lighter gun. Could go on, but I gots to go to work!
Click to expand...

Hmmmm, I'd love some details on why you figure the .260 is superior to the .25-06 in bullet flight, recoil, and length and weight of the gun. I'll give you the muzzle blast thing (although the difference is immaterial IME and IMO), but I'm not seeing the rest of it.

Let's take, for example, the 115gr Hunting VLD at 3100fps (or even the 100gr GK at 3312fps from a 22" barrel) for the .25-06, and whatever bullet you want from the .260. The .25-06 is a Tikka T3. Choose whichever rifle you want for the .260.

Ready....go. ;)
 
115gr VLD @ 3100 fps
250y zero = -13" @ 400y
400y impact speed 2400 fps, 1460 ft lbs, 9" drift (10mph crosswind)

130gr VLD @ 2850 fps
250y zero = -15" @ 400y
400y impact speed 2275 fps, 1490 ft lbs, 9" drift

in 8 lb gun, 25-06 16 ft lb recoil
in 7.5 lb 260 14 ft lbs recoil

rounds per lb of powder, 25-06 approx 125, 260R 155

260 delivers the same goods with less powder, longer barrel life,and a wider selection of bullet weights to shoot (85 to 160gr vs 75 to 120)

case closed, 260 FTW!
 
todbartell said:
115gr VLD @ 3100 fps
250y zero = -13" @ 400y
400y impact speed 2400 fps, 1460 ft lbs, 9" drift (10mph crosswind)

130gr VLD @ 2850 fps
250y zero = -15" @ 400y
400y impact speed 2275 fps, 1490 ft lbs, 9" drift

in 8 lb gun, 25-06 16 ft lb recoil
in 7.5 lb 260 14 ft lbs recoil

rounds per lb of powder, 25-06 approx 125, 260R 155

260 delivers the same goods with less powder, longer barrel life,and a wider selection of bullet weights to shoot (85 to 160gr vs 75 to 120)

case closed, 260 FTW!
Click to expand...
I don't think we should share this with all those .25-06'd deer.;)
 
todbartell said:
115gr VLD @ 3100 fps
250y zero = -13" @ 400y
400y impact speed 2400 fps, 1460 ft lbs, 9" drift (10mph crosswind)

130gr VLD @ 2850 fps
250y zero = -15" @ 400y
400y impact speed 2275 fps, 1490 ft lbs, 9" drift

in 8 lb gun, 25-06 16 ft lb recoil
in 7.5 lb 260 14 ft lbs recoil

rounds per lb of powder, 25-06 approx 125, 260R 155

260 delivers the same goods with less powder, longer barrel life,and a wider selection of bullet weights to shoot (85 to 160gr vs 75 to 120)

case closed, 260 FTW!
Click to expand...

That's why I have a 6.5-06 :dancingbanana:
BUT, on my long-term want list is a ultralight rifle in .260. Something like the one Todd Bartell has. Something like 6 lbs scoped. That would be cool. :cool: But it won't be THIS year; probably not next year either. :kickInTheNuts:
 
todbartell said:
not a bad choice if you can't find a 260 Remington, which is superior in all respects
Click to expand...

Hmm, since I suspect Tod is only partially joking. I'll call him out on this one.

You'll need to post some numbers comparing same bullet weights to convince me. In fact, I'm so not convinced that I just purcased a 25-06 AI to give me an advantage over my long barrelled Swedish mausers in 6.5x55 (which is superior in all respects to it's runty cousin the .260 :p) shooting light and medium weight bullets.

As far as I can tell, a regular 25-06 will give you 200-300 fps more velocity with same bullet weights. Last time I checked 200-300 fps was about the differnce between a 30-06 and a 300 win mag. Look at 120gr bullets for example, published at 2800 for the 6.5x55 (let's just be real nice to the .260 for this comparison and pretend it can equal the 6.5x55 :)), and 3100 for the 25-06. And those .257 bullets are not exactly shaped like flying bricks either, their BC's are pretty high. At 500 yards the 6.5x55 shooting 120gr partition is -46 inches and 917 ft/lbs while the 25-06 with 120 gr partition is -39 inches, and 1018 ft/lbs. Clearly superior in both bullet drop and retained energy. For someone wanting to slap varmints, the 25-06's 75 gr bullets pushed at 3700 fps only drop 33.5 inches at 500 - nothing in the 6.5x55/.260 arsenal is that flat shooting.

If a fellow is wanting to go for bigger game most entirely (moose etc), then the 140's - 160's of the 6.5x55 would likely make it a bit of a better than the 25-06 for "real" big game. But, even though I'm being nice to the .260, but let's be honest and admit the .260 is really not meant for those long 160's anyway, and really starts to lose gas compared to it's clearly superior 6.5x55 cousin when shooting the heavier 6.5mm bullets.
 
Northman999 said:
Hmm, since I suspect Tod is only partially joking. I'll call him out on this one.

You'll need to post some numbers comparing same bullet weights to convince me. In fact, I'm so not convinced that I just purcased a 25-06 AI to give me an advantage over my long barrelled Swedish mausers in 6.5x55 (which is superior in all respects to it's runty cousin the .260 :p) shooting light and medium weight bullets.

As far as I can tell, a regular 25-06 will give you 200-300 fps more velocity with same bullet weights. Last time I checked 200-300 fps was about the differnce between a 30-06 and a 300 win mag. Look at 120gr bullets for example, published at 2800 for the 6.5x55 (let's just be real nice to the .260 for this comparison and pretend it can equal the 6.5x55 :)), and 3100 for the 25-06. And those .257 bullets are not exactly shaped like flying bricks either, their BC's are pretty high. At 500 yards the 6.5x55 shooting 120gr partition is -46 inches and 917 ft/lbs while the 25-06 with 120 gr partition is -39 inches, and 1018 ft/lbs. Clearly superior in both bullet drop and retained energy. For someone wanting to slap varmints, the 25-06's 75 gr bullets pushed at 3700 fps only drop 33.5 inches at 500 - nothing in the 6.5x55/.260 arsenal is that flat shooting.

If a fellow is wanting to go for bigger game most entirely (moose etc), then the 140's - 160's of the 6.5x55 would likely make it a bit of a better than the 25-06 for "real" big game. But, even though I'm being nice to the .260, but let's be honest and admit the .260 is really not meant for those long 160's anyway, and really starts to lose gas compared to it's clearly superior 6.5x55 cousin when shooting the heavier 6.5mm bullets.
Click to expand...

Idle hands today;) so just for the hell of it, I did an admittedly, quick check and comparisson between the 25-06 and the 260. The info on velocity and bullet drop I've taken from a couple of my Sierra manuals. As highlighted, in the weights up to about 117gr/120gr bullets, the 25-06 seems to be ahead a little in performance. At the 120gr mark, the 260 starts to edge ahead.

25-06260comparisson.jpg


So for me, with some long range possibilities on preds, varmints and Deer sized game, I think the 25-06 fills the bill quite nicely. Again, when and if it comes to 'pushing' a 260 or 6.5 caliber to the top end of its capeabilities, especially with some of the heavier bullets available, I'll accept my friends offer to acquire his 264 Winchester Magnum.
 
Johnn Peterson said:
Again, when and if it comes to 'pushing' a 260 or 6.5 caliber to the top end of its capeabilities, especially with some of the heavier bullets available, I'll accept my friends offer to acquire his 264 Winchester Magnum.
Click to expand...

I have, in the past, looked the the .264 WM and came to the conclusion that the 6.5-06 may be a better choice - especially in a shorter barrel.

BTW - 2900fps with a 120gr bullet out of the .25-06 seems quite slow.
 
purple said:
The Swedes and Finns shoot a lot of moose(they call them elk):eek: with the 6.5x55 using heavier bullets. The ballistic coefficient of the heavier 6.5mm bullets is excellent.
Click to expand...

Yes, they are excellent.

Like I said, I really like 6.5's, and my post meant no slight at all to any 6.5mm caliber cartridge.

But, after seriously looking at 25-06's compared to 6.5x55 with lighter bullets, I found there was a signifnicant enough performance difference favoring the 25-06 for me to go looking for one.
 
1899 said:
I have, in the past, looked the the .264 WM and came to the conclusion that the 6.5-06 may be a better choice - especially in a shorter barrel.

BTW - 2900fps with a 120gr bullet out of the .25-06 seems quite slow.
Click to expand...

:redface:You're quite right:redface:. The muzzle velocity listed for both the 117gr and the 120gr should've been 3100 f/sec. How I screwed up on that I don't know as the 117gr Sierra SBT @ 3100 f/sec is one of my best loads. Nonetheless, that does seem to be the point/weight where the 260 starts to edge ahead in performance.

Correction.jpg


Again you're quite correct. In addition to the 6.5-06 being a good alternative, the 6.5-284 Winchester is right in there also. The reason I mentioned the 264 Winchester Magnum as an option in my case is a very nice one, including a sizeable selection of components and dies etc, has been offered to me by an old friend. If I decide to go for something in that caliber range, I'd be foolish to turn it down:).
 
Johnn Peterson said:
Again you're quite correct. In addition to the 6.5-06 being a good alternative, the 6.5-284 Winchester is right in there also. The reason I mentioned the 264 Winchester Magnum as an option in my case is a very nice one, including a sizeable selection of components and dies etc, has been offered to me by an old friend. If I decide to go for something in that caliber range, I'd be foolish to turn it down:).
Click to expand...

Go for it, the 264 can be fun.....personally ive been down that road and Ive stuck with a 6.5x55 and now ive got a 6.5-06 in the works just for the hell of it.:)
 
todbartell said:
115gr VLD @ 3100 fps
250y zero = -13" @ 400y
400y impact speed 2400 fps, 1460 ft lbs, 9" drift (10mph crosswind)

130gr VLD @ 2850 fps
250y zero = -15" @ 400y
400y impact speed 2275 fps, 1490 ft lbs, 9" drift

in 8 lb gun, 25-06 16 ft lb recoil
in 7.5 lb 260 14 ft lbs recoil

rounds per lb of powder, 25-06 approx 125, 260R 155

260 delivers the same goods with less powder, longer barrel life,and a wider selection of bullet weights to shoot (85 to 160gr vs 75 to 120)

case closed, 260 FTW!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but this is from JBM. The .25-06 clearly wins in wind drift, velocity, and retained energy. The recoil difference that small will be more affected by the load you're shooting and the rifle design than by whether you choose the .25-06 or .260. The .25-06 gets 132 rounds out of a pound of powder using my load, and the 100gr or 120gr TSX or TTSX is all you'll ever need on elk or moose. The T3 in .25-06 weighs about 6.5 lbs bare, and about 7.5 lbs with scope and mounts. Same as the .260. So again, it seems to me that the .25-06 dominates the .260 in performance at the cost of a bit more gun powder. I'm not seeing any sort of superiority here...

Here's the chart:

l_f126ba69e34e4ba895a0fe503402fd71.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom