Thread: If you only had one to rule all

Originally Posted by Hunter_Nick

I’m interested in the ‘knock down power’ What exactly is that, can you explain this with physics? I ask because a .30 cal 174gr bullet from a .303 hits a target with slightly less ‘power’ than a cricket ball thrown at the same target….

I think ‘knock down’ is a misleading term.

Hillbilly science here Nic, I mean knock it off its feet sort of thing nothing technical bang flop ratio

Id probably have a 6.5x55

Originally Posted by ChrisW

Id probably have a 6.5x55

The king of chamberings!

Sent from my SM-A226B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by ChrisW

Id probably have a 6.5x55

Interesting the 6.5x55 has been around for ever, manufacturers are still reinventing the wheel around a similar cartridge, the Crudmoor being a prime example

Originally Posted by Bent Barrel

Interesting the 6.5x55 has been around for ever, manufacturers are still reinventing the wheel around a similar cartridge, the Crudmoor being a prime example

Short action

Originally Posted by Kelton

Short action

Short action, woopy-fking-do. People get on this short action crusade to save weight and/or get questionably faster reloading time. Out in the real world you hardly notice either. When it comes to maybe a couple of grams weight saving I'm in the "harden the fuck up camp' or carry a bit less other crap. A bit of weight is usefull to steady the aim after a bit of exertion. Getting back to example of 6.5x55, there are modern 'improvements' on this round but will they be around as long as this well proven round ? I don't own one but mate does and its effective, just like my young 308 or 223. I know it's human nature to try and improve on things but a lot of the old stuff just works. A bit like the automotive industry, the pricipals haven't moved on from designs dating back to the early 1900's or earlier. And remember there were electric vehicles before internal combustion automobiles, just didn't have much range - just like today - Sorry, rant over but just had this discussion with a young fella on hill this morning.

Originally Posted by woods223

Short action, woopy-fking-do. People get on this short action crusade to save weight and/or get questionably faster reloading time. Out in the real world you hardly notice either. When it comes to maybe a couple of grams weight saving I'm in the "harden the fuck up camp' or carry a bit less other crap. A bit of weight is usefull to steady the aim after a bit of exertion. Getting back to example of 6.5x55, there are modern 'improvements' on this round but will they be around as long as this well proven round ? I don't own one but mate does and its effective, just like my young 308 or 223. I know it's human nature to try and improve on things but a lot of the old stuff just works. A bit like the automotive industry, the pricipals haven't moved on from designs dating back to the early 1900's or earlier. And remember there were electric vehicles before internal combustion automobiles, just didn't have much range - just like today - Sorry, rant over but just had this discussion with a young fella on hill this morning.

I like your reply especially the A bit of weight is usefull to steady the aim after a bit of exertion. even more so when one comes across the its looking at me shoot now deer: but for me handle something like a Shultz and Larsen or an early Sako and quality just stands out - then pick up a modern Tikka - made to a price and they feel like it - I will sacrifice a little bit of carrying slightly more weight for quality and craftmanship and handling every day of the week -caliber well a bigger hole -availability of ammo -resale - all play a part as I dont reload -my rant for day

Originally Posted by woods223

Short action, woopy-fking-do. People get on this short action crusade to save weight and/or get questionably faster reloading time. Out in the real world you hardly notice either. When it comes to maybe a couple of grams weight saving I'm in the "harden the fuck up camp' or carry a bit less other crap. A bit of weight is usefull to steady the aim after a bit of exertion. Getting back to example of 6.5x55, there are modern 'improvements' on this round but will they be around as long as this well proven round ? I don't own one but mate does and its effective, just like my young 308 or 223. I know it's human nature to try and improve on things but a lot of the old stuff just works. A bit like the automotive industry, the pricipals haven't moved on from designs dating back to the early 1900's or earlier. And remember there were electric vehicles before internal combustion automobiles, just didn't have much range - just like today - Sorry, rant over but just had this discussion with a young fella on hill this morning.

Its not weight nor cycling for me I like short actions always have I like shorter over all rifles I I espically dislike short action cartridges on long actions tikka saur 100 etc 223 on a .270 size action just isnt for me . Personal preference is all . Model 7 being one of my favorite plateforms means the creedmoor has it merits to me personally as I also like to mag feed and edject live rounds

Originally Posted by woods223

Short action, woopy-fking-do. People get on this short action crusade to save weight and/or get questionably faster reloading time. Out in the real world you hardly notice either. When it comes to maybe a couple of grams weight saving I'm in the "harden the fuck up camp' or carry a bit less other crap. A bit of weight is usefull to steady the aim after a bit of exertion. Getting back to example of 6.5x55, there are modern 'improvements' on this round but will they be around as long as this well proven round ? I don't own one but mate does and its effective, just like my young 308 or 223. I know it's human nature to try and improve on things but a lot of the old stuff just works. A bit like the automotive industry, the pricipals haven't moved on from designs dating back to the early 1900's or earlier. And remember there were electric vehicles before internal combustion automobiles, just didn't have much range - just like today - Sorry, rant over but just had this discussion with a young fella on hill this morning.

I've got some round wheels if anybody is interested latest craze out...

The king of kings

Tell ya what I still have a soft spot for the 270 and I've had shit tonnes of other wizz bang cartridges but I have been really really impressed with the 243 for just being a good wee killer thats super easy to shoot, it inspires confidence and is very reliable for neck shots with those animals that are just a wee bit further away, easy to find decent factory ammunition etc etc. Really can't be bothered flinging lead at animals that are 400+yds away these days and anything closer is in a world of trouble with the 243 anyhow.

New sells. Look at bars for eg a bar opens is popular for a while then dies off then same bar renames its self and its off again for a while and so on....

270 is a harmonic divisor number[1]
270 is the fourth number that is divisible by its average integer divisor[2]
270 is a practical number, by the second definition
The sum of the coprime counts for the first 29 integers is 270
270 is a sparsely totient number, the largest integer with 72 as its totient
Given 6 elements, there are 270 square permutations[3]
10! has 270 divisors
270 is the smallest positive integer that has divisors ending by digits 1, 2, …, 9.

Maybe. But 0.277” is none of those things.

I prefer just drops it on the spot. No need to make the poor animal do cartwheels as well

A few opinions here are a bit like the camo thread. People get so staunch because of their own opinion on what has always worked in the past and can’t accept new things that might be better. The old stuff works well, the new stuff works well and often better. You don’t “need” the new stuff to be successful because the older stuff does still work fine but that doesn’t mean that some of the new stuff isn’t better. Stubborn mindsets. Grow, learn, adapt, evolve, improve. No need to get so upset about new stuff, it’s been happening for thousands of years.