lr .260h? over lr.308

[Zak Smith]

Originally Posted by Tomcat088

Howdy myfault. The article that you list has some truth to it, and it also has ALOT of BS that is just touting the horn of the .260. I can tell you for a fact that there is NOW WAY IN HELL that the .260 will outperform the .300 winmag at long range.

I'm the author of the article under criticism.

Tomcat088 and I had a little ballistics discussion over here which might prove interesting

http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/ar-talk...tml#post975164

[Tomcat088]

Yes you and I already talked over there. I know you're the author. I will say the exact same thing that I did over there. I am not trying to say that your paper is wrong or false, merely that manyh of the conclusions people are drawing from it are wrong. We've already talking about people's opinions of "apples to apples" etc and you want to discount lathe turned bullets etc. As I stated before, the later numbers that you've posted seem a bit more fair to me, but I still don't necessarily think that the .260 is a "better" long range round.

[Zak Smith]

In the full-house table (here), 260 REM has 1.6" more wind drift @ 1000 yards with a 10 mph cross, and it has 0.9 MOA more drop. Keep in mind this is comparing a 140gr @ 2860 to a 210 @ 2900 fps. As I said over there,

With regard to .260 vs. .300WM specifically, look at how close the wind drift performance numbers are at 1000-- the 300 shooting the 210's has 59.01" and the 260 shooting the 140's has 60.64". There is less than 1 MOA difference in elevation required to get to 1000 yards. This is virtually identical performance!

So why would I want to shoot the .300WM when I can shoot the .260 with 57% less recoil, 48% less powder, and about 14% less cost per bullet? Not counting recoil, the 300WM is 31% more expensive to shoot than the 260 round for round. If you're willing to accept an extra 0.163" wind drift per mph cross and 0.9 MOA more drop @ 1000 yards, the only thing the 300WM gives you is more mass on target and 33 fps more impact velocity.

For target shooting on paper or steel, this is a non-issue. For hunting, it can make a difference in terminal effect; however, I submit that you can get better long-range performance from cartridges other than 300WM at ranges where 260 might not be sufficient (and I consider it competent on thin-skinned game to 600-750 yards based on the fact that it has more terminal potential at 750 than a .30-30 does at 250 yards, which is certainly within its capable range).

Now, you can buy off the shelf factory rounds for the 260 which shoot the 139-142's @ 2800-2830 fps which beats the off the shelf factory 190gr SMK load for 300WM. You can make a lathe turned bullet in any caliber and it'll beat conventionally-made bullets. That's nothing specific to 300WM.

[Tomcat088]

I will agree with what you say about the .260 being capable of taking deer to the ranges you discuss. I'm also not saying that at ranges that you could take the .300 winmag out to that you couldn't take the .260 out to, there aren't better calibers than the .300 winmag. I still don't think there's much of a point in comparing "off the shelf" loadings for the .260 and the .300 winmag. If you're talking about serious distance shooting, nobody is gonna be shooting factory stuff. You and I also both know how conservative the loadings for the .300 winmag are from the factory, they don't even come close to harnassing the case capacity. You and I both agree that you can make lathe turned bullets in any caliber beat conventional bullets. I'm just saying, comparing lathe turned bullets for the .260 and lathe turned bullets for the .30, I think the heavy .30's, or even some of the fairly heavy .30's will have the edge over the .260 lathe turned bullets. Sure if you want to get into the 7mm's they'll beat the .30's when you take them further than what the .260 usually goes.

I will not even dispute your claim that the .300 winmag is more expensive to shoot. I realize it does use more powder and I haven't priced .260 bullets. I know what the .30's cost. I haven't ever tried to price .260 brass. I don't the life of the brass or quality. There's lots of things that I don't know, so I won't dispute that it's more or less expensive, but I am curious about the numbers.

The other reason that makes me wonder if it's a "better" caliber has to do with availability. Sure you might can get this one load to shoot as good, but can you come by the components very easily? Are there very many choices in terms of bullet weight, manufacturers, design, brass makers, etc? Since we're talking about serious long range shooting, like 700 yards or more, I think it's all reloads. So all these things make an impact, and although the ballistics might be "just as good". I still don't think that necessarily equates to overall a "better" long distance rifle. I will say that we discussed the recoil issue some and how many rounds are fired, etc. I don't know that many guys that just sit down and crank off more than 60 rounds at a time. It takes alot of time to load that many rounds properly, and if you're being serious about it, it costs alot of money. Sure in matches guys shoot that, but I don't know that many guys that sit down at the bench and just rip off a ton of rounds. Most of the guys I'm around sit down and make 10, 20 or 30 rounds count. I don't hang around alot of competitive shooters though, I'm around more of the guys that make 1 or 2 shots count. Maybe that's why I have no problem running through 30 rounds of .300 winmag.

As I stated before, I mean no disrespect to you currently, nor did I when I spoke about your article here or on the XD forum. I am glad that you are here because I know the people here would love to have your input on long distance shooting and in general rifles. My apologies if my "bashing" is what got you here, but we're all glad to have you. I will say that I am a hunter and typically I think in those terms, kinetic energy delivered on target in 1 or 2 shots. I don't shoot paper except to practice, and I don't shoot competitions, so maybe thats' why my thinking appears so "biased". Either way, I can tell you're one heck of a shooter, know your ballistics and can support the claims that you do make in your paper. I hope to see you around and again I hope there's no hard feelings.

[Zak Smith]

I will say that we discussed the recoil issue some and how many rounds are fired, etc. I don't know that many guys that just sit down and crank off more than 60 rounds at a time.

People who like to shoot.. let's not say "crank off", but a full day of UKD LR shooting can easily be 100+ rounds.. depends how much ammo we've got, really. Also note that a day's F-class match (1000 yards) is at least 60 rounds (scored rounds), with 15-60 more sighters usually taken (5-20 per "match").

Sure you might can get this one load to shoot as good, but can you come by the components very easily?

Yes. 260 brass is factory form is available from at least 3 brass manufacturers. It can be formed easily (ie, resized to) from 243, 7-08, 308, etc-- 308 obviously being available everywhere. If you expand to the other 6.5mm mid-sized cartridges (6.5x47 Lapua and 6.5 Creedmoor), you have a few more options also. There are gazillion 6.5 mm bullets on the market, for eveything including varminting, benchrest, long-range, big game, etc.

I still don't think that necessarily equates to overall a "better" long distance rifle.

So what metric shows that 300WM is "better"?. I've offered numeric comparisons for wind, drop, barrel life, recoil, powder burned, cost, velocity, etc using both "factory" and full-house data. There's nothing wrong if you just "like" the .30 caliber, but don't make it sound like it's anything more than emotional preference.

In my book, at least the same performance at much less cost is "better." Your mileage may vary.