With the newer and better ballistic cartridges like 260 Remington and 6.5 creed more existing is there any reason to even buy a 308 anymore? Even prices for the other ammo is about the same as 308.
Also what is better? 260 or 6.5 and why?
Same reason why the 3006 still remains the king of North American hunting. The 308 does its job fine unlike shitty 223.
general availability and ammo sharing with your other hungry guns
not major disadvantages, but just for consideration.
>>29912498
false dichotomy.
>>29912517
Explain
>6.5 can kill stuff that the 308 can't kill
Oh wait
>>29912480
I shoot .308 because you can easily find FALs and CETMEs/G3 clones that are chambered in .308
Just because another caliber is "better" doesn't mean shit if there are no guns chambered in it. Look at .357 SIG, it is objectively better than 9mm but it doesn't matter because everything is chambered in 9mm and 9mm does good enough that it's not worth changing
>>29912480
>is there any reason to even buy a 308 anymore?
availability
>>29912480
>Is there any reason to buy .308 anymore
Having guns in .308 might be a reason.
>>29912540
>The 308 does its job fine unlike shitty 223.
>>29912480
>Better cartridge
Trajectory alone =/= better cartridge.
Look at the energy difference.
.308 is fully viable and will remain so for many years to come.
What's it worth if I can't find ammo?
Can't say for sure, but a .308 barrel might last a little longer.
>>29912742
>Look at the energy difference.
I'm looking. what about it?
Bigger bore cartridges of equal pressure are more efficient with shorter barrels. The 6.5 doesn't NEED a long barrel to get the job done, but you're wasting powder, losing more velocity, and creating more blast for no reason if you get a short barrel.
But the real reason is Mah NATO, tradition, and availability. Almost everyone has a .308, almost everyone sells .308, the .30 caliber has a huge traditional following in the US largely due to the impact of the .30-06, and it is capable of taking out anything in North America within reasonable limits.
Hell, a better question is why the .30-06 still exists when the .308 is a perfect replacement for it. Answer: .30-06 still works.
Oh, and as for .260 vs 6.5, it's largely a wash. No one shooting or being shot by either could tell the difference. The 6.5 seems to be more popular but the .260 can be much more easily made from spent .308 cases if you're into that.
>>29912480
.260 Remington isn't new
And the reason to go with .308 over 6.5 is that cheap blasting ammo is under 50cpr for brass cased stuff.
Also factory barrels in .308 are very common. Very few in 6.5 anything. I own both .308 and 6.5 creedmoor.
Get me an 18-20" SCAR barrel in 6.5 creedmoor for under $1500 that will do moa with factory hornady loads and we can talk about me dumping .308 all together.
>>29912879
.260 doesn't hold 140grain bullets very well.
Creedmoor was designed specifically for that.
And you can convert .308 to creedmoor, just takes a couple more steps
>>29912862
30-06 is also superior when using bullet weights greater than 180gr
>>29912862
It goes even further back to the .30-30, which is still in use in a few leverguns.
>>29912480
Do you have any reason to exist? No? So be an hero
>>29912968
Yeah 30-06 was a waste in the mil sense, but the civil market can actually take advantage of extra case capacity. Idgaf what anyone says it's basically the magnum cartridge that the average Joe doesn't realize is a mag.
6.5 will only take off when the US Army starts using that 6.5mm CT round they want.
>>29912651
/thread
>>29912498
>he uses 30-06
>>29913602
Im so fucking sick of seeing this bitch's face
>>29912651
>lower capacity
>higher pressure
>objectively better
308 has heavier bullets and more muzzle energy for hunting dangerous game bigger than varmints. those high bc target bullets are not meant for dumping a ton of energy AND penetrating deep enough to drop bigger game. but most of you are range fairies anyway who cant handle recoil.
>>29913653
I'm not
<3 <3 <3
>>29912651
>Look at .357 SIG, it is objectively better than 9mm but it doesn't matter because everything is chambered in 9mm and 9mm does good enough that it's not worth changing
Except for the whole
>significantly more recoil
>significantly more muzzle climb
>can't be effectively suppressed due to no ability to get or make subsonic ammo that still cycles
>lower capacity
>all while throwing a 9mm bullet of roughly the same weight that expands to the same diameter and penetrates to the same depth as 9x19, providing *zero* advantage in terminal ballistics over 9x19
It's like they took the *one* advangate .40s&w had and engineered it out of the round. Oh sure, if you're one of those fucktards that thinks carrying FMJ is reasonable, it'll penetrate a little deeper than 9x19 due to being slightly faster (about 150fps, which is pretty marginal), but any properly built hollowpoint will penetrate to the same depth.
>>29913881
>>29912540
That's actually a true statement.
A 140-150gr 6.5mm bullet will penetrate deeper than a 150-165gr .308 bullet, assuming they're launched at similar velocities (and they usually are outside of the 6.5mm wildcat magnums). And with literally all modern hunting bullets holding together well enough at any velocity they could conceivably be launched at, the 6.5mm is basically the more lethal of the two.
>>29912879
>it's largely a wash
Let's see...
>70fps more MV with same weight bullets
or
>fits in all standard .308 mags with anything heavier than a varmint bullet
There's a reason why the majority of long-range setups using .260 are built on long-action rifles. They would either require single-loading in a short action because anything over a 120gr bullet doesn't fit in the mag (including internal mags), or require a long action.
>>29912973
It actually goes back to the .30-40 Krag/.30 US. Which predates the .30-30 by a decade and was actually a military caliber, unlike the .30-30.
>>29913013
Except due to the prevalence of old (pre-1945) guns still in use, factory .30-06 ammo is so ridiculously cold loaded you gain absolutely not a single fucking foot per second over .308, while requiring a longer barrel to do it and getting about 40% more recoil.
Sure, handloaders with modern rifles can take it into the low magnum category, but there's a reason wildcats like the .25-06AI and .338-06 A-Square or Ackley exist.
>.338-06AI produces about 15% more MV and ME than a .338WM while requiring only a 22" barrel to do it instead of a 26" barrel while kicking less
>>29913732
Nothing wrong with higher pressure. Space under the pressure curve is energy imparted to the bullet, after all.
>>29914021
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/172373/federal-power-shok-ammunition-308-winchester-180-grain-soft-point-box-of-20
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/596951/federal-power-shok-ammunition-30-06-springfield-180-grain-soft-point-box-of-20
>308
Muzzle Velocity: 2620 fps
Muzzle Energy: 2743 ft. lbs.
>3006
Muzzle Velocity: 2700 fps
Muzzle Energy: 2913 ft. lbs.
>you're wrong
30-06 Soft point is stronger than 308 and costs the same.
>Also what is better? 260 or 6.5 and why?
.260 Rem has slightly more case capacity, but, in general, lacks variety in factory loadings. 6.5 Creedmoor, being shorter, is more appropriate for auto-loaders using .308 Win magazines. Being supported by Hornady, 6.5 Creedmoor also currently has more diversity in factory loadings.
If you're an avid reloader into target-shooting, .260 Rem has more flexibility for you. If you're into auto-loading rifles, 6.5 Creedmoor is better optimized for you.
>>29914064
>here let me cherry-pick a heavy-for-caliber bullet loading that's extremely rare and still show they only differ by a *massive* 80fps
99% of both .308 and .30-06 loads are either 150gr or 165gr. In both instances they will be basically identical on both MV and ME.
You're that faggot that goes "Nuh uh! Here look at this custom loaded small-batch $3/rd super-nuclear 10mm that has a billion disclaimers about which guns it can be used in!" when someone shits on the "10mm=.41mag" argument.
>>29914073
.260rem would require being built on a .30-06 action to get this versatility you speak of, even with handloads. 130gr VLD's and all 140gr+ bullets will not even fit in the internal mags of any short-action boltgun despite it being a short-action, .308-derived caliber.
>>29913943
>>29914107
Yeah I mean who the hell uses 180 grain 30-06 right? :^)
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/248766/remington-express-ammunition-308-winchester-150-grain-core-lokt-pointed-soft-point-box-of-20
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/196583/remington-express-ammunition-30-06-springfield-150-grain-core-lokt-pointed-soft-point-box-of-20
>308
Muzzle Velocity: 2820 fps
Muzzle Energy: 2648 ft. lbs.
>30-06
Muzzle Velocity: 2910 fps
Muzzle Energy: 2820 ft. lbs.
>cost=the same
Look ma I did it again!
Does a hunter want to spend the same amount of money losing 223 Joules because he wants to be more modern?
>there are people who still think 308 perfectly replaced the 30-06
>>29913931
>>29914021
>factory .30-06 ammo is so ridiculously cold loaded
>requiring a longer barrel to do it and getting about 40% more recoil.
Magic physics eh
>>29913013
Truth. My 220gr handloads out of my ER Shaw barrel sing out to 700 yards. Yeah it's a pig heavy gun, but I love it and it's accurate as hell. Plus, the 30.06 case is really easy to work with from a reloading perspective. Nice large case mouth and it tolerates high pressures nicely.
>>29913948
Where are you finding 140gr-150gr hunting loads for 6.5 Creedmore? It's hard enough finding good 140gr+ hunting loads in 7mm-08 outside of Federal. 160-170gr hunting rounds in .308 are super easy to come by in comparison.
Not to mention, 6.5 Creedmore is lucky to be pushing a handloaded 150gr at 2700fps if loaded hot as shit, and your accuracy will likely suffer for it. Compare that with a Hornady 165gr .308 SST bought in the store that's pushing 2800fps easily.
Besides, 6.5 tends to outshine 7.62 at ranges where most people won't (or can't) hunt. If you're capping mountain goats beyond 500m, sure, 6.5 all the way. But that's well past my comfort zone.
>>29912480
Bunch of decades of use, production, and guns.
Same reason why 22lr still exists despite 25acp.
>>29915033
this.
I use 168 gr .308 SST for moose, works just fine under 300 meters. Hunters who want more range will i go all in for a .300 win mag or any other magnum.
>>29915132
Never hunting the big ungulates. Got to be honest, I'd be a bit terrified of seeing a moose within 100m with only a bolt action .308.
.260 Rem and both 6.5 calibers all perform more or less the same. Biggest question you should be asking is which cartridge has better component (brass quality, ect) availability, because Creedmore is the only one with decently available commercial loads.
There could be an argument made that the sharper shoulder angles on 6.5CM and 6.5x47 increases barrel life, but I have yet to see any actual scientific testing that proves this theory.
>>29912958
any suggestions on a setup for a .308 conversion under $1000?
>>29915301
Literally just a new barrel. Casehead for 6.5CM and .3308 is exactly the same. Can use the same magazines.
>>29915190
They're pretty chill even close. I would not go near them during the hunting season because they are full of hormones and males are in competiton, but if you don't do anything sudden, they won't be agressive.
>>29912480
because animals haven't evolved bullet resistance.
6.5 Lapua has trouble feeding in autoloaders, from what I've been told.
.260 Rem has the absolute worst manufacturer support of the three (when it comes to factory loads).
![6-5-creedmoor_006[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/w9fWnlX.jpg "6-5-creedmoor_006[1].jpg")
>>29912480
1. Cost
2. Availability
3. Barrel Life
4. Short Barreled Rifles
Most load data for Creedmoor is for barrels nearly a foot longer than the 16" carbines most of /k/ has. It gets harder and harder to hit that ~3000fps target. Which is why the RFP for the US Army Marksmanship Unit for the .264 USA lists 107gr Sierra HPBT @ 2,875fps from a 16.7" barrel or 123gr Sierra HPBT @ 2,657fps from a 16.7" barrel as its threshold.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/11/10/usamu-264-usa/
Powder improvements and cartridge development should have allowed us to replace both the 7.62 and 5.56 by now, but dogma and the AR platform hold us back.
Price
Barrel life
>>29916494
No, there just have been no significant advances in powders or bullets to necessitate a move from the AR platform.
>>29912929
ill buy a 6.5 barrel for an ar10 and some reloading dyes maybe when they make them for the scar as well so i dont have a tamed wildcat round for one rifle
>>29916549
Behold. The perfect example.
>>29912498
>.223
>Shitty.
>Not knowing you can get three deer with it because after shooting the first one his battle buddies have to break cover to drag him to safety.
>>29916575
that is one sexy gun
>>29916592
never repair a working system.
thats fucking sage advice right there, kid.
>>29916713
I am >>29916549
And >>29916592 is a dumb nigger faggot.
However--- "if it's not broke don't fix it" is limited in its usefulness as a blanket statement. Just because something works, even if it works very well, doesn't mean it is the best course of action/solution etc. this is why we see continuous improvements not only in business (a great example of constant improvement as we move to lean production and design)
But with most other weapon systems, faster missiles, better signal processing tech, etc.
But chemical propellants for small arms and internal combustion are reaching the end of their developmental lifespan. Not to say we may not still have a few major break throughs with other very mature tech (those new incandescent bulbs with the reflectors that prolong lifespan and make them more energy efficient than LED's.... Can't remember name but anyway)
TLDR you are right
>>29916713
True, but you can replace an inefficient one with something more effective.
Not that the AR platform has many issues.
>>29915132
The 6.5 will work under 300 meters as well... And beyond that tends to have more energy.
>>29915585
>6.5 Lapua has trouble feeding in autoloaders, from what I've been told.
I've been told the same but seen no evidence. Tbh it should have no more problem than the Creed as the given reason is the 30° shoulder, and they both have that. I'm willing to accept that should angle can accept feeding reliability (surely a 90° shoulder would jam up against any protrusion that could be slitly in the way) but I don't think 30° is the point where reliability suffers.
>>29917184
> The 6.5 will work under 300m
Absolutely, Swiss used it for years. I suspect many opted for a wider wound channel when they could get it though, especially if they were looking at a North American moose.
> And beyond that tends to have more energy.
I had trouble finding a good 140gr 6.5 load for comparison, but Hornady does make premium ELD-X hunting bullets in 140gr 6.5 and 178gr 7.62. The 7.62x51 has more energy out just past 500 yards.
>>29917453
http://www.hornady.com/store/6.5-Creedmoor-140-gr-ELD-Match/
vs
http://www.hornady.com/store/308-Win-168-gr-BTHP-Match/
The 6.5 starts off with more energy, only gets better from there
>>29914147
that file name
>>29917736
Good catch
>>29917663
Well, if you get to use a heavy-for-caliber low velocity expanding round, then so do I.
http://www.hornady.com/store/308-Win-178-gr-ELD-X-Precision-Hunter/
178gr .308
Velocity/KE
Muzzle: 2600/2672
100: 2437/2348
200: 2281/2056
300: 2130/1792
400: 1984/1556
500: 1846/1346
143 gr 6.5 Creedmore
FPS/Energy
Muzzle: 2700/2315
100y: 2557/2076
200y: 2419/1858
300y: 2285/1658
400y: 2156/1475
500y: 2030/1308
If we're both using Hornady's horrifically expensive bullets, the .308 is the leader out to 500m.
This has been fun and all, but it's a moot point anyway. If you're already taking game with your 6.5, me posting up some joules isn't going to make you buy a new rifle.
6.5mm bullets are a meme. Ever military that used them dumped them for .30/8mm rounds later on (see Sweden, Italy, and Japan).
Hell even countries where the 6.5 Swede (Norway, Sweden) is a popular hunting round it is being replaced by .30 cal rounds such as the .30-06.
The 6.5-7mm bullets exist for bench rest shooters and people who jerk off to ballistic tables.
>>29917898
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/07/26/potd-the-polymer-cased-264-usa/
>>29913390
>US Army starts using that 6.5mm CT round they want.
When is never
>>29917898
> 7mm bullets exist for bench rest shooters and people who jerk off to ballistic tables.
> i.e. not red-blooded American hunters
Im seeing alot of talk about barrel lenghts and velocity for .308 so read this article
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/10/daniel-zimmerman/the-truth-about-barrel-length-muzzle-velocity-and-accuracy/
He also has a second article on the same subject
>>29918600
Same anon here. These calibre debates are always funny as well. Seems more suited to the children in the schoolyard then adults. Which calibre is better? Who cares. Everyone seems more focused on reading up on velocity and Bc trying to get flat trajectory and muzzle velocity, similar to that .308 diagram from earlier. Dosnt matter, even at 500 throught to 1000m .308 will still travel with enough force to kill. Instead of debating you should be shooting. Thats the only important thing with guns. Not muzzle velocity, energy or anything else. Its accuracy. And thats achieved soley by you through practice.
>>29918954
All the range and stopping power in the world cant help you if you cant shoot for shit.
>>29912480
because we already have a shit load of 308 and weapons chambered in 308
>>29915132
>implying 300 win mag is not ideal for all game at all calibres
>never shot a prairie chicken at 30 yards with gods 300 win mag the same day as taking a moose at 400
>probably sucks dicks too
>>29917898
and thuddy cal has been largely replaced by .22 pea shooters.
Hey guys i've been eyeing a 6.5 bolt action rifle for a while...... But i can't decide between that or a 5.56 AR styled rifle....
help
>>29920294
why not both
I like .308 but it does kinda suck when 3 seconds cost me $34
>>29920346
because i can't afford both...... i suppose its a choice of which one to buy now and which one to wait on
>>29920370
Then flip a coin if it's just a matter of getting one sooner
>>29920374
............................ yeah fuck it. You've got a point
>>29920379
For budget sakes, go for the cheaper one.
>>29920386
if memory serves, i believe the 5.56 was cheaper.... idfk i'll check. Thanks for the help guys
>>29918954
I kind disagree but not 100â„….
Accuracy can be assisted with proper caliber and case choice, however your practice will matter much more. The next thing to be concerned with is if the cartridge has enough power and proper trajectory to get the job done. Beyond 450-500m, 6.5 Creed/6.5×47L have a clear advantage over 7.62×51, all while being lower recoil and cheaper to reload (esp if you cast your own, but then you most likely meed to accept lesser consistency) due to needing less powder to get there. HOWEVER that is not to say .308 is shit past 500m, as it is a perfectly valid choice- there are just better options out there.
>>29920541
Maybe. Read that trueguns link i posted but in regards to barrel lenght and accuracy
>>29920294
There are probably bolt-action 6.5 uppers for the AR-15.
B A R R E L L I F E
A
R
R
E
L
L
I
F
E
>>29918954
Not to mention that bullet design has overcome the issue of bullets tumbling when entering the trans sonic zone and below, even. A good modern match bullet will stay true even below supersonic speeds. As long as you know your velocity and drop tables, you can shoot really fucking far with .308. Of course other calibers have advantages with wind being faster and skinnier.
>>29921369
Wait. We have? Can I get some documentation? This is news to me.
>>29912480
Does the diameter matter that much?
>>29918954
The caliber debates depend on what you want the bullet to do. If you're trying to hit targets at long ranges, those velocity and BC numbers become important, especially when it gets windy. If you're hunting game within 300 (more like 200 in my case) yards, bullet construction and diameter become very important, assuming you can actually place your shot at those ranges and want a wide blood trail.
Long range hunting, something I have yet to try, sounds like a compromise. You need enough velocity and BC to get to the target without drifting off course, but now you have to make sure your bullet will still expand at the lower velocities so you still get a wide, deep wound. I think that's why a lot of mountain hunters say fuck it and just reach for a magnum caliber.
everyone of you /k-fags forgets the no.1 reason for .308 : barrel life
and no.2: cost
>>29912480
Yes, while 6.5 is much better, it also wears the barrel down after about 2,500 rounds.
A .308 will easily shoot 7,000 plus, especially if it's chrome lined.
6.5 is called the .260 done right, so maybe that answers that for you, but the real question is
>why not both?
>>29921930
>wears the barrel down after about 2,500 rounds
do you always buy barrels made of play-doh?
My 7mm-08 will just be sitting sadly over here in the corner, all alone.
>>29916612
>audibly keked
Nice one.
>>29913984
>"Largely a wash"
>Esoteric example in which people looking for every last bit of energy possible for the purpose of competition posted as response.
Buddy, nobody who would consider either cartridge for hunting or military applications would give even the slightest shit. It's largely a wash.
>>29912968
>180+ grain bullets
Again, very few people would bother, and any application in which they would be used could be compensated for with .308 by either getting slightly closer or using better bullets.
The advantage of the .30-06 over .308 doesn't become readily apparent unless you handload or get expensive specialty loads, at which point you could be looking at other calibers, requires of use a long action vs short action, and necessitates more powder.
Like, the .30-06 obviously has an ballistic advantage if loaded to potential, but I can't fathom where it would make any notable difference. Biggest advantage I see of the '06 over .308 is more resistance to IT'S HAPPENING buyer panic ammo scares.
>>29914021
>.338-06 AI
>Not using based 9.3x62
The Kaiser would be ashamed.
>>29912480
270 Winchester is better than all of the above.
>>29922527
Anybody know why they went with a .277 instead of a .284 bullet for the .270?
>>29923134
because we don't want your stinking metric boolit we'll make our own special snowflake 7mm!
Which one can penetrate armor better? The .308
>>29912480
Cartridge usually doesn't matter, so I just roll with what I can afford to shoot the most of.
>>29912802
What are you using to calculate?
>>29923223
Lol no
>>29923223
but that's wrong, you fucking idiot.
>>29912480
I can buy tulammo .308 for 40 cents a round and it feeds out of all of my rifles. Why the fuck would I want to get some boutique 2$/round cartridge I can only order online that virtually no guns are chambered in?
>>29922011
This, even some hotter 6.5 cartridges last ~3000 shots (if I remember correctly 6.5 SAUM is one of them).
>>29923258
it's not calculated, that's Federal's factory data.
https://www.federalpremium.com/products/rifle.aspx
>>29913931
>>29923203
So the .284 was a Euro bullet first? Does that explain why I can find more high BC bullets in 7mm-08 than .270?
>>29923650
because .270 failchester has a slow as fuck twist and is unsuitable for long, high-SD bullets.
>>29922458
At least 7mm-08 can be bought in bulk at walmart during a panic and can be good out to like 1500 yards.
>>29913602
>He fell for the 'Only fuds use .30-06' meme.
I really wish faggots like you would ND into their head.
>>29912515
>tfw rem 700
>tfw currently saving for either a ptr or a fal
>tfw I'll be the king of 7.62X51REALFUCKINNATO by the end of the year
Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
>not switching to long-action cartridges.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y8FJDqx1cw
>>29923298
If you want a precision rifle that does well beyond 500 yards. The match grade ammo for 6.5CM is cheaper than .308 match ammo and performs better.
>>29913948
Literally what?
F=MA
F(nato)=(larger mass)(same acceleration) = bigger force
F(creed)=(smaller mass)(same acceleration) = lesser force
"A 165 grain mass and a 140 grain mass travel at the same velocity. The 140 grain mass will do more damage."
False.
????????
>>29926090
Where are you finding 6.5cm match ammo for under a dollar per round?
>>29926270
Not that anon, but he mentioned penetration. That's largely a function of velocity, bullet construction, and sectional density.
The 140gr 6.5 has a higher SD than 165gr 7.62. Assuming similar construction and impact velocity, the 6.5 should penetrate farther.
Not necessarily more damage as far as more hemorrhaging, just a deeper if narrower wound channel.
>>29923814
I don't really know much about .270, but a quick trip to wikipedia shows:
.270 Winchester
1 in 10 twist
150gr@2850fps
7mm-08
1 in 9.5
150gr@2650
Seems like it's got enough twist to stabilize a 150gr at higher velocity than 7mm-08.
>>29926320
Derp. I should have said bullets. You can reload 6.5CM for cheaper than .308.
>>29920365
>27s
7/10 You should try some Southern Cuts
>>29926422
Ah, forgive me. I'm still learning about ballistics and things, all I know so far is basic physics. Thanks for explaining, I'll read up on sectional density and penetration.
>>29927192
>You should try some Southern Cuts
I don't smoke, that's why they are in a bag.
>>29912802
Colours are back to front bud
>>29922011
The research I read into stated that after about 2,500 you would begin to notice barrel wear, but it wouldn't be completely burned out, that would be more along the 3,500-4,000
>>29926041
Wouldn't that be an RD? ND would mean it was a negligent thing to do...
>>29929814
yeah, soft as fuck stainless match barrels maybe. a harder barrel will last much longer.
>>29928266
I have no problems assigning the curves to the respective loads.
are you telling me a 200 ft-lbs difference at the muzzle means jack shit?
.30-06 has about 5% better ballistics than .308 at the sacrifice of about 20% more recoil. It is literally not worth it.
>>29931504
Not to mention it also requires a long action gun.
>>29931506
Yup. And if you reload, you are using about 40% more powder, making reloading more expensive pretty quickly.
>>29931539
but you can also push the 30-06 to the pressure limit which commercial ammo doesn't always do
>>29916612
*i move away from the mic to high five my bro*
>>29931540
How would the recoil/ballistics of a hot loaded .30-06 compare to a .300 Win Magnum?
>>29913390
I'm gonna assume that they're gonna redesign the the 6.5 CT to be smaller and lighter, right?
You don't need that much powder behind a grunt's carbine. It would be ideal if they could make a 6.5mm round with a bit more range and punchthan the 5.56 at around the same weight as a brass cased 5.56
