- Banned
- #1
Newtosavage
WKR
Was thinking about this on my morning drive and couldn't work it out so I thought I'd ask folks here who have a lot more experience with firearms and reloading than I have.
I understand the premise of the 6.5 CM and the PRC's (basically all the latest modern cartridges) that are designed to allow you to seat the high BC long bullets further out to engage the lands without protruding deep into the case. Makes sense.
But here's what I can't quite figure out. Let's take the .260 Rem and the 6.5 CM for example. The same 143 ELD-X will protrude quite a ways into the .260 case and not nearly as far into the CM case. BUT, the 260 case is larger to begin with so at the end of the day don't they basically both have the same amount of powder space?
So is the point of the newer cartridge designs (aside from the obvious benefits of a steeper shoulder extending case life and reducing trimming frequency) a more efficient powder "chamber"?
Same could be said for the 7RM and the 7PRC I guess, and others.
Someone with more knowledge and experience in cartridges please 'splain.
Thanks!
I understand the premise of the 6.5 CM and the PRC's (basically all the latest modern cartridges) that are designed to allow you to seat the high BC long bullets further out to engage the lands without protruding deep into the case. Makes sense.
But here's what I can't quite figure out. Let's take the .260 Rem and the 6.5 CM for example. The same 143 ELD-X will protrude quite a ways into the .260 case and not nearly as far into the CM case. BUT, the 260 case is larger to begin with so at the end of the day don't they basically both have the same amount of powder space?
So is the point of the newer cartridge designs (aside from the obvious benefits of a steeper shoulder extending case life and reducing trimming frequency) a more efficient powder "chamber"?
Same could be said for the 7RM and the 7PRC I guess, and others.
Someone with more knowledge and experience in cartridges please 'splain.
Thanks!