130g ELD 6.5mm in 260?
- Thread starter Michael C
- Start date
I found a sweet spot for A-tip 135s in my Bighorn 260. 44.3 grains of H4831sc gives me 2768 fps out of a 26 inch barrel.
Kurz
Silver $$ Contributor
That's pretty much all I shoot these days, 130 gr. but in the 6.5 Creedmoor.
I gave up on both the 260 and 4350 several years ago.
You can shoot the ELD-M at 2.825" for magazine feeding with the 4350 at 44.00 gr. still which gets you to the 2900 node easily. Not quite as fast as your 123 gr. and they may not be as accurate either. They weren't in my rifles.
I switched to Re-16 and the Berger 130s which runs near the upper node and is cleaner than the 4350. Brownells has the Re-16 in stock.
Enjoy!
I gave up on both the 260 and 4350 several years ago. You can shoot the ELD-M at 2.825" for magazine feeding with the 4350 at 44.00 gr. still which gets you to the 2900 node easily. Not quite as fast as your 123 gr. and they may not be as accurate either. They weren't in my rifles.
I switched to Re-16 and the Berger 130s which runs near the upper node and is cleaner than the 4350. Brownells has the Re-16 in stock.
Enjoy!
Most people I know that own a .260, the H4831sc works best for accuracy. H4350 is faster and very accurate also. Other powders work well for it also but personally I've never found one more accurate that H4831sc. 46.0 grains gets me 2860 with a 140eld with a 25" barrel. The 130 will easily make 2950-3000 and should be very accurate as well.
Hoot
Silver $$ Contributor
What brand of brass are you using and to what COL? I have a bottle of 4831sc that I have been meaning to crack open and try in my .260. My Peterson brass has a lot less capacity then the RP brass I have. Un-tweaked, QuickLoad predicts that your charge of 4831 runs about 100 fps faster and that was loading the 140 ELD at 2.88 COL, just to get it to fit in there uncompressed. I may do a ladder run in the next couple of days. Its supposed to be real comfortable temps before Friday.
Thanks,
Hoot
With the 140 Berger's my OAL is 2.97. I've been loading Lapua beass. The 140 Amax is shorter but at the moment I cannot remember the OAL with it. The most accurate bullet for me has been the 139 Scenar. I prefer the Hornady's as they are priced the best and for me they shoot as good as any. The scenar would be the bullet I'd shoot if I shot competitively.
Last edited:
So what's the appeal of the 130 vs the much higher BC options of the 140 and 147? Lots of good accuracy reports with the 140 in particular.
It's been awhile since I ran the windage calculations, but I'm pretty sure the 140 and 147 will shoot inside of the 130 even with the speed penalty in 260 and 6.5crd.
It's been awhile since I ran the windage calculations, but I'm pretty sure the 140 and 147 will shoot inside of the 130 even with the speed penalty in 260 and 6.5crd.
39.0 grs of Varget or IMR4064, with 130's in 260 Rem .Super accurate, but not the fastest. 43.8 grs H4350 with 130 Hybrids works very well. In my 260 rem with 136 Lapua scenars or 140 Hybrids I use 46.5grs, H4831SC in Lapua case.
Here's some good reading:
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com...uses-260-rem-to-win-national-hp-championship/
Here's some good reading:
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com...uses-260-rem-to-win-national-hp-championship/
The problem is that you are compressing the loads heavily, with the long bullets. I don't mind compressing loads, but the 130 and under fits the .260 much better. I use the long bullets more in my Creed, as it works better in the standard mag.
Kurz
Silver $$ Contributor
PRS type competitions require the use of magazines. Your OAL disqualifies your loads from magazine use no matter how accurate.
As noted, the 6.5 Creedmoor allows for magazine length loads for PRS competitions using the 130 class bullets. This what we used after dropping down from the 6.5GAP4S (6.5 SAUM). We did not find any handicap from using the 130s as opposed to using the 140s.
The difference now though is the switch in PRS to the 6mm BR cartridge family in all it's variety of cases. So most of the above is strictly an answer to the OPs question without regard to competition. This doesn't mean you can't compete with any of the 6.5mm cartridges, it's simply a statement of what is taking place within the realm of competition currently.
https://precisionrifleblog.com/2018/12/14/rifle-caliber/
Guess it's a good thing I don't compete then.. .BTW they do fit in magazines.PRS type competitions require the use of magazines. Your OAL disqualifies your loads from magazine use no matter how accurate.
As noted, the 6.5 Creedmoor allows for magazine length loads for PRS competitions using the 130 class bullets. This what we used after dropping down from the 6.5GAP4S (6.5 SAUM). We did not find any handicap from using the 130s as opposed to using the 140s.
The difference now though is the switch in PRS to the 6mm BR cartridge family in all it's variety of cases. So most of the above is strictly an answer to the OPs question without regard to competition. This doesn't mean you can't compete with any of the 6.5mm cartridges, it's simply a statement of what is taking place within the realm of competition currently.
View attachment 1190787
View attachment 1190786
https://precisionrifleblog.com/2018/12/14/rifle-caliber/
Coincidentally, I was extracting the key dimensions of 120-130gn 6.5mm match bullets from Bryan Litz's book Ballistic Performance of Rifle Bullets 3rd edition, albeit in my case with 6.5 Grendel more in mind. (I do have a 260 Rem competition rifle, but like @284winner's it's throated long so I primarily use 140gn bullets in it.)
I do have 100 130gn ELD-Ms to try (alongside 123s), but Bryan L's stats don't look too promising for the 130gn version. Here's what Bryan found in his long-range range testing as average i7 ('form factor') values for the lower drag bullets in this weight category in high to low order (ie poorest to best):
130gn ELD-M .................. 1.079
130gn Sierra TMK ............ 0.977
123gn ELD-M .................. 0.974
123gn Scenar .................. 0.950
123gn Sierra MK* ............ 0.928
130gn Berger OTM Tac ..... 0.924
I've used the average 'form factor' value as we have two bullet weights in the list, the 130 models' higher sectional density boosting the resulting BC when combined with form factor. Form factor is a drag based comparison against the reference projectile, the G7 model here. As in all such ballistics systems using a reference base, the reference is given a value of 1.000 and the others produce less drag (and a higher BC all other things being equal) if they have a value below 1 and more drag if above. So, in this group, the 130gn ELD-M generates nearly 8% higher drag than the G7 reference and at the other extreme, the 123gn SMK and 130gn Berger OTM Tactical between 7 and 8% less across a range of speeds in a long-range flight.
The other thing I don't like about the 130gn ELD is that it is closer to being a secant ogive type than the others, Bryan giving it an Rt/R value of 0.67 (0.50 = classic VLD form; 1.00 = true tangent). The other models all have higher values for this metric between 0.72 (123gn SMK) and 0.94 (123 Scenar). The more efficient 123 ELD-M is in between at a reasonably high 0.86 and the 130 Berger is of course a hybrid ogive so doesn't have this metric, but is supposed to behave as a tangent form in the bullet jump / 'tuning' aspect.
However if the 130gn ELD-M shoots 'better' (ie produces smaller groups) than the others in my Grendel, I'll forgive it all its 'faults' and probably use it. Right now I'm shooting Lapua's 120gn Scenar, another relatively high-drag model (1.018), but which the barrel likes more than the others I tried initially.
* The 123gn Sierra MK values quoted are for the reintroduced model in the new pattern box and with factory meplat pointing. 'Pointing' aside, Sierra has changed the design in all respects apart from tail section angle and length, so it is actually a new bullet with a lower form factor and higher BC than the old model (green box). This has implications for seating depths / COALs as the ogive has moved in relation to the base, so those with both types (like me) have to redo the COALs for the new version.
I do have 100 130gn ELD-Ms to try (alongside 123s), but Bryan L's stats don't look too promising for the 130gn version. Here's what Bryan found in his long-range range testing as average i7 ('form factor') values for the lower drag bullets in this weight category in high to low order (ie poorest to best):
130gn ELD-M .................. 1.079
130gn Sierra TMK ............ 0.977
123gn ELD-M .................. 0.974
123gn Scenar .................. 0.950
123gn Sierra MK* ............ 0.928
130gn Berger OTM Tac ..... 0.924
I've used the average 'form factor' value as we have two bullet weights in the list, the 130 models' higher sectional density boosting the resulting BC when combined with form factor. Form factor is a drag based comparison against the reference projectile, the G7 model here. As in all such ballistics systems using a reference base, the reference is given a value of 1.000 and the others produce less drag (and a higher BC all other things being equal) if they have a value below 1 and more drag if above. So, in this group, the 130gn ELD-M generates nearly 8% higher drag than the G7 reference and at the other extreme, the 123gn SMK and 130gn Berger OTM Tactical between 7 and 8% less across a range of speeds in a long-range flight.
The other thing I don't like about the 130gn ELD is that it is closer to being a secant ogive type than the others, Bryan giving it an Rt/R value of 0.67 (0.50 = classic VLD form; 1.00 = true tangent). The other models all have higher values for this metric between 0.72 (123gn SMK) and 0.94 (123 Scenar). The more efficient 123 ELD-M is in between at a reasonably high 0.86 and the 130 Berger is of course a hybrid ogive so doesn't have this metric, but is supposed to behave as a tangent form in the bullet jump / 'tuning' aspect.
However if the 130gn ELD-M shoots 'better' (ie produces smaller groups) than the others in my Grendel, I'll forgive it all its 'faults' and probably use it. Right now I'm shooting Lapua's 120gn Scenar, another relatively high-drag model (1.018), but which the barrel likes more than the others I tried initially.
* The 123gn Sierra MK values quoted are for the reintroduced model in the new pattern box and with factory meplat pointing. 'Pointing' aside, Sierra has changed the design in all respects apart from tail section angle and length, so it is actually a new bullet with a lower form factor and higher BC than the old model (green box). This has implications for seating depths / COALs as the ogive has moved in relation to the base, so those with both types (like me) have to redo the COALs for the new version.
The OP never mentioned PRS or competition in his opening question. Nothing about required OAL for magazines. Only the 130 grain bullets in the .260. Reading on I see he does in fact shoot where there are requirements. Sounds like there are OAL length max requirements. My 2.980 OAL rounds fit in my accurate mags so they do fit in mags. Obviously they wouldn't qualify but they work in my hunting Rigs.
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.