BigNate
WKR
Having stockpiled components for years, ima keep on shooting what I already have.
The answer is no. My recommendation is no. But my inventory says yes.
The answer is no. My recommendation is no. But my inventory says yes.
But yet, you answered. No stopping you!!A question for your question:
Are facebook questions, that lead to hundreds of responses, with no real answer needed?
No, but there is no stopping them!
I hoped so...I typed in my discussion and nothing came up in similar threads so I went ahead and sent it.It is still possible to have a discussion, albeit one that has been had many times. Be respectful, or don't comment. There are already comments and drama being brought over from other threads.
Don't call anyone out by name, as most don't want to be called out by others, or mods. Same goes for memes.
Maybe if you are over 69 years old and it cost 420 dollarsI took a survey of the level of excitement Christmas morning, and unwrapping a 300 win mag was very close to the top of the list.
I paid under $400 for my first M70 .300 WM.Maybe if you are over 69 years old and it cost 420 dollars
Do you have a link? Id like to check that out. So far everything I have read suggests that there are multiple factors at play, energy being one that, while relevant, is only relevant if it is expended (ie bullet does not pencil or carry energy out the other side), and is highly dependent on 1) how and where within the wound channel it is expended and 2) if there is additional mechanism that isn’t related to energy (such as bullet fragments causing additional injury during the temporary stretch cavity while tissue is near its elastic limit). In other words, what I have read is that everyone already agrees energy is relevant, but none of the resources I have read claim energy is predictive of good performance by itself, none even ask how much damage is “enough”, and no one looking holistically says energy is the only thing thats relevant. Which aligns perfectly with what the “little gun advocates” here are saying. If someone legit is saying otherwise Id like to check that out.... Both bullet placement and energy do matter and Harvard PHD and West Point ballisticians have recently proven that…
Please site the reference.Both bullet placement and energy do matter and Harvard PHD and West Point ballisticians have recently proven that.
They shouldn't be buying a 338LM to kill blacktails in the thick forests of the coastal California mountains.
Hmm what if there was something in between those two calibers that was distinctly American and didn’t use the rather sus metric system?I don't think i'd tell anyone to start with a 30 cal if they were new and wanted 1 rifle for everything but rather a 6.5 or 7.
Can’t argue with all the pics/stories of dead game and devastating wound channels with 223’s - 6.5’s with the right bullets.
You and I would get along just fine. I couldn’t agree more.Needed? No. Still cool/effective? Yes.
Was just out at my gunsmith's yesterday and we were having this exact conversation about the .308 Winchester. I have this bizarre affinity for that cartridge even though I own identical rifles chambered in more efficient rounds that are easier to shoot.
There is absolutely nothing sexy about a 168 grain .308 caliber bullet leaving the muzzle at 2600 FPS, and the dang rifle will jump out of your hand at less than 6 pounds scoped, but I'll never sell it and I know exactly what to expect when I point it at a critter (bang flop).
The only reason to buy any variety of 30 these days is "want" not "need".
I had just made a run for more coffee..
Local 30-cal magnum support group talking about foot pounds of energy.