Re: to go 260 remington, or stick with 308
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mohawk3A</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just because it carries more energy doesn't mean it's more lethal. To make it simple....
A .260 is not rated lethal enough to take down 600lb game. With a .308 you can take 600 lb game with 155 g bullets and up. There are a lot of situations wher I would rather have my .260 but to say that the .260 completely dominates .308 in every fashion is absurd. Why can't we just admit that they both have there place? </div></div>
I dont want to get too far off in the mud here, but how about this analogy:
The 45acp is a well established, excellent cartridge many people rely on. However, no one disputes the higher lethality and simply, higher performance of the 10mm. The 10 fires a smaller diameter, lighter bullet with higher sectional density, at higher velocity, of course with more energy. To make the analigy even better, consider the 400 corbon cartridge, which essentially matches 10mm performance, as a necked down 45acp.
In this example, a smaller projectile with higher SD and velocity and energy undisputedly yields more lethality.
I love the 308. I have 4 rifles chambered in it. Its awesome how widely available the ammo is and how easy it is to load for. However, I MUST acknowledge the facts, and they all say the 260 is superior ballistically - certainly in regard to exterior ballistics, perhaps not in regard to interior ballistics, and very probably, based on human understanding, terminally (which is NOT an exact science).
Edit: No one has claimed that 260 completely dominates in every way. There are drawbacks including ammo, components, and even rifle availability. Barrels admittedly dont last as long. These have been mentioned, and I dont think even the most vehement supporter of the 260 would argue those points.
I thought we were talking about ballistics.