Quote:

---

"Hornady—which developed the 6.5 mm Creedmoor specifically for long-range shooting in 2007—make both a 6.5x55 mm Swede and 6.5 mm Creedmoor load that use the same exact bullet advertised at identical velocities"

how could you dare to disillusion me this way?

---

Exactly. I can't say anything. One of long term very active members seems to be offended by "kicking sand" at the Creedmoor, and hasn't visited the forums for over a month ... Over a cartridge!

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Comparatively, the 7x57 mm Mauser, while it can still use the same bullet weights and even the same powder, falls a couple hundred feet per second short of the 7 mm-08 Rem.

---

Rubbish. Only in underloaded 7x57 factory ammunition. What a larger capacity case produces less velocity?

Regarding guntalk there is now lots of talk about the 7x57/.275 Mauser but who hears of the 7mm/08 nowadays?

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

That said, to do a fair comparison, we’ll only reference the older cartridge ballistics to keep within the theme of this article. The original .30-'06 Sprg. loads used a 150-grain bullet traveling at a now modest 2,700 f.p.s. However, .308 Win. loads nowadays will do that and more, reaching nearly 3,000 f.p.s. using the same bullet weights.

---

Why the articial old ballistics restrictions? New vs new loads would show the advantage of the .30-06. Drivel indeed.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

7.92x57 mm Mauser vs. .338 Federal

---

.323 vs .338, same bullet weight. Not a valid comparison. Only a 100 fps difference.

How does a .318 WR .330 compare in a modern loading, 200 gr bullet?

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

.45-70 Gov't. vs. .458 SOCOM

---

The writer changes the methodology for this one, otherwise the .45/70 using the original methodology is faster and better by the criteria.

But the SOCOM can be used in an AR.

Carrying big magazines of lots of ammo might be a military consideration. It's usually not for sporting hunters.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Why Still Shoot Century-Old Cartridges?

This probably raises the question of why we should even bother with older cartridges? For one, there’s something to be said about the fact that these cartridges still exist. That in and of itself is a testament to their utility. Have we made improvements, and in some ways all but obsoleted these ancient rounds?

---

Because per real analysis without artificial biased restrictions they are better! And are uber cool and classic.

The article is designed to sell ammunition and new rifles.

Some people prefer the latest. Most on here love classics. Still doing what they have for a 120 years! In new rifles or lovely old vintage rifles.

These drivel space filling articles at least allow us something to moan and argue about.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Gun writers get paid by the word, don't they.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Gun writers get paid by the word, don't they.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Yeah, pretty much drivel...

More of the same newer is better crap. Comparing original 100yr old ballistics to modern factory loads.

Sure, the 308 is a better .308 cal. cartridge if you're toting belts or cans of military rounds through the jungle, but it will never match the 30'06 when the actual shooting starts.

Same as the 30'06 won't match the 300WM or 300H&H. Why bother comparing the two?

That said, the 30'06, with proper bullets will do 95% of the 300WM or H&H and leave the 308 behind long before that.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Yeah, pretty much drivel...

More of the same newer is better crap. Comparing original 100yr old ballistics to modern factory loads.

Sure, the 308 is a better .308 cal. cartridge if you're toting belts or cans of military rounds through the jungle, but it will never match the 30'06 when the actual shooting starts.

Same as the 30'06 won't match the 300WM or 300H&H. Why bother comparing the two?

That said, the 30'06, with proper bullets will do 95% of the 300WM or H&H and leave the 308 behind long before that.

---

My September 1936 M70 makes 2,960fps with a 165gr. SST AND just over 1/2" for 5 shots at 100 meters, just saying.

---

I do not know why everybody is so wrapped in the 30-06. It is just a passing fad

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

The bore diameter of the 8 X 57 was not changed. The GROOVE diameter was enlarged from .318 to .323 and bullet weight and shape were changed.

---

Does this mean non S cartridges or .318 projectiles can be used reasonably ie "accurately" in a .323 groove bore?

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I do not know why everybody is so wrapped in the 30-06. It is just a passing fad

---

Good one.



--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The bore diameter of the 8 X 57 was not changed. The GROOVE diameter was enlarged from .318 to .323 and bullet weight and shape were changed.

---

Does this mean non S cartridges or .318 projectiles can be used reasonably ie "accurately" in a .323 groove bore?

---

I can't speak for Australia but, in the US I don't know if you can find loaded .318 bullets in 8 x 57 ammo. As I understand it most ammo makers in the US use .321 bullets and load the 8 X 57 down.

I imagine .318 bullets in a .323 barrel would give at least serviceable accuracy but, I don't know. In the US .323 bullets abound, for handloaders. I know of one source for .318 or, do as I do and swage .323 down.

--------------------
Jesus said, "I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me." John14:6

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Daryl, .303 and I are expressing sarcasm. Meaning the opposite of what is said.

I'm sure when the .300 Winchester Magnum was the "Creedmoor" of the day, it was said the .30-06 was obsolete and dead. Yet today I would guess more .30-06s would be sold than.300 Win Mags?

I expect one-day the same for the other current 100% unmentionable manbun cartridge ...

---

I was somewhat inebriated when I wrote that.

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Got to have something to fill the pages, between the articles proclaiming the latest and greatest plastic pistol.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

There needs to be someone willing to write an article comparing old gunwriters Vrs modern ones

---

A problem with the internet, is volume and speed.

Short articles, quickly and poorly written, to fill space, to sell advertising. Not a monthly, quarterly or gGod forbid Annual printed magazine, but daily. On social media a page or group without several new posts a day dies quickly in the algorithms.

The writer's need to pump out dozens of articles a month.

Short articles also don't examine a subject well and thoroughly.

Photos and images. Instead of taking hundreds, even thousands of ones own original material. Sorting, editing, culling. Making the photos tell a story along with the print, just stick any crap as illustrations. Steak someone else's hard work.

Sames as news media. Poorly quickly written. Without research and real fact checking. Has to be out quickly. As it's on the net, just edit it galore as time ticks over. Sometimes the end result is completely different from the first edition ..

Film. DVDs rarely made today. Seems to be shorter little films nowadays? For the internet. Can people still make real money making hunting films today? Unless one can sell to some paying channel?

Thankfully we still have books! So far.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I always wondered about .318s in a .323 bore. A while back I got a good deal on some Woodleigh 200 gr RNSN .318s and some 196 RNSN .323 so I decided to test it.

Since I didn't have a lot of bullets, I took some shortcuts. I used new brass, went straight to near-max loads with IMR 4350 (about 2,500 fps), and only shot 5 shot groups. I sandbagged the rifles on the bench, and fired a shot every couple minutes to let the barrels cool a bit. Test guns were a K98k with iron sights, and a Remington 700 Classic (old Weaver T6 scope).

The K98k averaged about 2" with either bullet at 100 yards, the groups overlapped about 60%. The Remington 700 gave me separate groups, around 1" for the .323s and around 1.125" for the .318s.

I'd hunt with either of them in my 8x57.

---

Interesting. Thanks.

A military advantage might be the ability to use older ammo in the new rifles. Logistics is always a big ammo issue.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I always wondered about .318s in a .323 bore. A while back I got a good deal on some Woodleigh 200 gr RNSN .318s and some 196 RNSN .323 so I decided to test it.

Since I didn't have a lot of bullets, I took some shortcuts. I used new brass, went straight to near-max loads with IMR 4350 (about 2,500 fps), and only shot 5 shot groups. I sandbagged the rifles on the bench, and fired a shot every couple minutes to let the barrels cool a bit. Test guns were a K98k with iron sights, and a Remington 700 Classic (old Weaver T6 scope).

The K98k averaged about 2" with either bullet at 100 yards, the groups overlapped about 60%. The Remington 700 gave me separate groups, around 1" for the .323s and around 1.125" for the .318s.

I'd hunt with either of them in my 8x57.

---

Post Extras: