Comments of 260 Remington Cailber
- Thread starter Mighty Peace
- Start date
RememberTheSomme
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nova Scotia
I had to add this edit after reading the above quote again and seeing he said at 1000yds and punching holes in paper. I did see red and started typing right away. The post is as typed however. Apologies to Hend238 this is not directed to you specific but it is how i feel rergarding blanket comparisons of the ,260 to the .300WM........
This is the second thread where someone is saying the 260 Rem out performs the .300WM.
Frankly I don't even see much Factory ammo listed for this orphaned grandchild of the .30-06. Must be a Handloaders dream no doubt. I saw the 7mmRem Mag born and have heavy hitting Factory loads only to be tamed down and stabilized, then along comes a Factory loaded wildcat some silhouette shooters dreamed up to shoot steel chickens with, and Remington boxed it up and called it the 7mm/08. People sang its praises, Ballistics charts were distorted, Hand loading books from different makers biased it to get it of the ground and into our psyche, comparing it to the 7mm Rem Mag and how it was as good or maybe ,maybe even better. Quick run out a buy a new rifle right? BAARRMMMMPPPPP!
Now thats finally subsided somewhat, and everyone knows their real place in the food chain, theres still the .308 versus 7mm08 versus .270 etc etc and thats good. Well,....... along comes the .260 crowd, and their out for real game,..... they are going for broke and the .300WM. is in their light recoil requirement Scopes.
Can't wait for this BS to finally blow over as well. Get a real Cartridge if you want a short .30-06. It's called the 308WIN. I'm waiting for the .257/308 to hit the shelves in factory trimmings and go through all this weenie Baloney all over again! They will probaly take on the .338WinMag or even God forbid the .375 H&H. Blasphemy I say.
We need to insure we show that we are comparing apples to apples in all ways. When you say Ballistics to 1000yds then you are talking external Ballistics from muzzle to impact, both energy, velocity and trajectory.
Is it,..... theres not much to talk about anymore. Ballistically, its already been done and done for quite some time regarding shoulder fired, man portable firearms. Seems some are trying re -invent the Ballistic wheel where "less is always more". I'm sure theres quiet, experienced hunters and shooters with 7mm Weatherby Magnums, .257 Weatherby magnums, .300 Win Mags who know the goods and laugh quietly to themselves. What are these kids on today they are probaly thinking.
Someone told me they would come someday preaching a new Ballistics gospel, guess the time is at hand.
Yup, the high B.C. bullets of the .260 make for a real flat shooter in a compact package. Most hunters would be better off with a .260 or (or 7-08) if they are not handloaders than with a .300 Win Mag. Lots of guys I see out in the field with 300 WM's can't shoot them that well, and don't practice much at all.
The .260 shoots just as flat as a 300WM with less recoil, and with a good bullet will flatten most non dangerous game in Canada. Keep in mind a 140gr TSX bullet will penetrate more than a 200gr conventional cup and core bullet from a 30-06, and so will a similar bullet from a .260.
I'd probably pick something bigger if I was going after grizzly, bison or really big northern BC/Yukon moose, but for deer, black bear, sheep and goat, the .260 is a great option.
Last edited:
- Location
- Prince Albert, Sk
What is the need for this big loud shoulder bruising expensive magnums??? 
Try this one...................why don't we shoot what we can shoot well, with repetition and consistency.
As for long range, he who can read the wind and know his ballistics will be king, no matter what he shoots.
Try this one...................why don't we shoot what we can shoot well, with repetition and consistency.
As for long range, he who can read the wind and know his ballistics will be king, no matter what he shoots.
I had to add this edit after reading the above quote again and seeing he said at 1000yds and punching holes in paper. I did see red and started typing right away. The post is as typed however. Apologies to Hend238 this is not directed to you specific but it is how i feel rergarding blanket comparisons of the ,260 to the .300WM........
This is the second thread where someone is saying the 260 Rem out performs the .300WM.
Frankly I don't even see much Factory ammo listed for this orphaned grandchild of the .30-06. Must be a Handloaders dream no doubt. I saw the 7mmRem Mag born and have heavy hitting Factory loads only to be tamed down and stabilized, then along comes a Factory loaded wildcat some silhouette shooters dreamed up to shoot steel chickens with, and Remington boxed it up and called it the 7mm/08. People sang its praises, Ballistics charts were distorted, Hand loading books from different makers biased it to get it of the ground and into our psyche, comparing it to the 7mm Rem Mag and how it was as good or maybe ,maybe even better. Quick run out a buy a new rifle right? BAARRMMMMPPPPP!
Now thats finally subsided somewhat, and everyone knows their real place in the food chain, theres still the .308 versus 7mm08 versus .270 etc etc and thats good. Well,....... along comes the .260 crowd, and their out for real game,..... they are going for broke and the .300WM. is in their light recoil requirement Scopes.
Can't wait for this BS to finally blow over as well. Get a real Cartridge if you want a short .30-06. It's called the 308WIN. I'm waiting for the .257/308 to hit the shelves in factory trimmings and go through all this weenie Baloney all over again! They will probaly take on the .338WinMag or even God forbid the .375 H&H. Blasphemy I say.
We need to insure we show that we are comparing apples to apples in all ways. When you say Ballistics to 1000yds then you are talking external Ballistics from muzzle to impact, both energy, velocity and trajectory.
Is it,..... theres not much to talk about anymore. Ballistically, its already been done and done for quite some time regarding shoulder fired, man portable firearms. Seems some are trying re -invent the Ballistic wheel where "less is always more". I'm sure theres quiet, experienced hunters and shooters with 7mm Weatherby Magnums, .257 Weatherby magnums, .300 Win Mags who know the goods and laugh quietly to themselves. What are these kids on today they are probaly thinking.
Someone told me they would come someday preaching a new Ballistics gospel, guess the time is at hand.
You combine pilots are a radical bunch.What is the need for this big loud shoulder bruising expensive magnums???
Try this one...................why don't we shoot what we can shoot well, with repetition and consistency.
As for long range, he who can read the wind and know his ballistics will be king, no matter what he shoots.
RememberTheSomme
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nova Scotia
Yup, the high B.C. bullets of the .260 make for a real flat shooter in a compact package. Most hunters would be better off with a .260 or (or 7-08) if they are not handloaders than with a .300 Win Mag. Lots of guys I see out in the field with 300 WM's can't shoot them that well, and don't practice much at all.
The .260 shoots just as flat as a 300WM with less recoil, and with a good bullet will flatten most non dangerous game in Canada. Keep in mind a 140gr TSX bullet will penetrate more than a 200gr conventional cup and core bullet from a 30-06, and so will a similar bullet from a .260.
I'd probably pick something bigger if I was going after grizzly, bison or really big northern BC/Yukon moose, but for deer, black bear, sheep and goat, the .260 is a great option.
Will I guess we only need a .260 for all our Hunting Requirements here in Canada. If it will Flatten all non dangerous NA game(no range inserted so i assume you mean what a good shot can deliver on a broad side Moose with an accurate scoped rifle, how low are you prepared to go in the energy delivered at the target on these Non Dangerous Big Game to call it a day? 1000Ftlbs for moose maybe. 500Ftlbs?
You said if you Don't reload the .260 is a better choice over the .300.
Well I tried to do a head to head factory ammo comparison but its hard to even find many .260 loads. Remington being the proprietary company has the 140 ultra bonded Premier, so I picked that. Didnt see a better one?
Winchester the owner of the .300 has many loads of their own , Remington has lots of .300 as well, so i picked their XP3 180 a known performer' but no 260 load so no real head to head to be fair.
I see these result for factory ammo. You can polish up the .260 a bit but then i can add to the 300 as well ,so heres what I see.......
Rem .260 140 ultra. energy @ 100yds 2037Ft lbs
Win .300WM 180XP3 " " " 3174Ft lbs!
Energy @ 500yds, yes I cant really shoot my 300 that far cause I don't like the big bang thingy on my shoulder.....
The 260 got 1063 ft-lbs and drops 47.5 inches
The .300 has 1868 ft-lbs and drops only 37 inches
The .300 is not far behind the 260's 100yd energy @ 500yds!!!
I'm sure there are better factory higher BC bullets by other manufacturers for the 260, to compare more favourably, but you know what, its Remington's cartridge,...... If they ain't interested in it then neither am I.
No more time to waste on a steel chicken shooter, got to get to the Battle Rifle forums before I go.
Happy Canada Day Gatehouse. It has been fun, if I don't see you till after.]
I see where you may get confused. You are hung up on energy numbers....Ft/Lbs dont' kill game, holes in vital organs kill game. A .260 (or 6.5x55) with a good premium bullet will go through both lungs of a moose or elk, and that will kill them. Killing animals is quite different than sitting at home with your calculator crunching numbers.
I said if you don't reload the 7-08 is a better choice than the .260. There are more factory options for the 7-08 than the .260.
It's pretty clear that you are hung up on energy numbers, which is pretty meaningless compared to good shot placement and a good bullet. I wonder how anyone ever killed animals without a calculator?
Would you be afraid to shoot a moose at 100 yards with a 45/70 using factory ammo? Because the .260 factory ammo example you listed above has 300 ft/lbs MORE than Federals 45/70 load.
Some hot 22-250 or .220 Swift loads generate the same ft/lbs as some factory 45/70 ammo!
Still think foot/lbs are the most important thing?
I see where you may get confused. You are hung up on energy numbers....Ft/Lbs dont' kill game, holes in vital organs kill game. A .260 (or 6.5x55) with a good premium bullet will go through both lungs of a moose or elk, and that will kill them. Killing animals is quite different than sitting at home with your calculator crunching numbers.
I said if you don't reload the 7-08 is a better choice than the .260. There are more factory options for the 7-08 than the .260.
Well I tried to do a head to head factory ammo comparison but its hard to even find many .260 loads. Remington being the proprietary company has the 140 ultra bonded Premier, so I picked that. Didnt see a better one?
Winchester the owner of the .300 has many loads of their own , Remington has lots of .300 as well, so i picked their XP3 180 a known performer' but no 260 load so no real head to head to be fair.
I see these result for factory ammo. You can polish up the .260 a bit but then i can add to the 300 as well ,so heres what I see.......
Rem .260 140 ultra. energy @ 100yds 2037Ft lbs
Win .300WM 180XP3 " " " 3174Ft lbs!
Energy @ 500yds, yes I cant really shoot my 300 that far cause I don't like the big bang thingy on my shoulder.....
The 260 got 1063 ft-lbs and drops 47.5 inches
The .300 has 1868 ft-lbs and drops only 37 inches
The .300 is not far behind the 260's 100yd energy @ 500yds!!!
I'm sure there are better factory higher BC bullets by other manufacturers for the 260, to compare more favourably, but you know what, its Remington's cartridge,...... If they ain't interested in it then neither am I.
No more time to waste on a steel chicken shooter, got to get to the Battle Rifle forums before I go.
It's pretty clear that you are hung up on energy numbers, which is pretty meaningless compared to good shot placement and a good bullet. I wonder how anyone ever killed animals without a calculator?
Would you be afraid to shoot a moose at 100 yards with a 45/70 using factory ammo? Because the .260 factory ammo example you listed above has 300 ft/lbs MORE than Federals 45/70 load.
Some hot 22-250 or .220 Swift loads generate the same ft/lbs as some factory 45/70 ammo!
Still think foot/lbs are the most important thing?
RememberTheSomme
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nova Scotia
]
I see where you may get confused. You are hung up on energy numbers....Ft/Lbs dont' kill game, holes in vital organs kill game. A .260 (or 6.5x55) with a good premium bullet will go through both lungs of a moose or elk, and that will kill them. Killing animals is quite different than sitting at home with your calculator crunching numbers.
I said if you don't reload the 7-08 is a better choice than the .260. There are more factory options for the 7-08 than the .260.
It's pretty clear that you are hung up on energy numbers, which is pretty meaningless compared to good shot placement and a good bullet. I wonder how anyone ever killed animals without a calculator?
Would you be afraid to shoot a moose at 100 yards with a 45/70 using factory ammo? Because the .260 factory ammo example you listed above has 300 ft/lbs MORE than Federals 45/70 load.
Some hot 22-250 or .220 Swift loads generate the same ft/lbs as some factory 45/70 ammo!
Gatehouse you said the 260 is a better choice if you dont reload. Read your post, you added the 7mm08 AS WELL.
.22-250 and 220 swift are varmint calibers that do not have bullets normally designed to penetrate the mass of large game, what else are you going to throw ito this silly equation of yours.
The 45-70 will penetrate with weak factory loads at short ranges through heavy game because the bullet will not expand much thus allowing the minimun ENERGY to drive it home to the vitals.
Mass X velocity equals ENERGY which delivered behind a proper constructed bullet will always equal more penetration and not just getting inside to have a look around, but destruction of the vitals that brings about a rapid conclusion to your hunt, and not just part 1, with part 2 to take place with your tracker skills in all their glory.
The .300 Winchester Magnum posesses both mass and velocity at all practical NA big game ranges. It is a reliable penetrator and internal destroyer. The 260 at all NA ranges is marginal at best.
It appears that you yourself has advanced in the Ballistics understanding to know that pure energy figures alone don't tell the full story. But you have to remember it is a important part of the killing equation when all other parts are correct. Don't be so naive to reject Energy numbers and try to imagine only a bullet will make a tiny hole broadside.
If you think that just the light hole matters in Game, then I say hang up your 375 Ruger and take 260, it will put a light hole broadside into any animal in NA and yes even the largest bear. Good luck with that one. And with alot less recoil and expense.
I'm done arguing with such foolishness.
Conclusion.
The .260 Remington is not, and never will be a .300 Winchester Magnum when killing large Game. This is the Hunting thread i'm in right?
If you want a nice Deer Rifle out to 300yds or a light precision rig to punch holes in paper out to subsonic range for the cartridge where velocity deteriorates rapidly,the 260 is a nice flat shooter with gentle recoil. By the way the 6.5X55 to a handloader will do this and more and its been around for a million years.
Looking at the dismal amount of factory loads for the 260, I guess a couple of hundred
RememberTheSomme
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nova Scotia
ooops!
Last edited:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly Timoffee
What is the need for this big loud shoulder bruising expensive magnums???
Try this one...................why don't we shoot what we can shoot well, with repetition and consistency.
As for long range, he who can read the wind and know his ballistics will be king, no matter what he shoots.
awe, so Kelly is a combine pilot! no wonder why he can shoot that 7mm-08 so much $$$$$$$$$$$
Originally Posted by Kelly Timoffee
What is the need for this big loud shoulder bruising expensive magnums???
Try this one...................why don't we shoot what we can shoot well, with repetition and consistency.
As for long range, he who can read the wind and know his ballistics will be king, no matter what he shoots.
You combine pilots are a radical bunch.
awe, so Kelly is a combine pilot! no wonder why he can shoot that 7mm-08 so much $$$$$$$$$$$
- Location
- Prince Albert, Sk
Think I'll have to put my occupation in my profile, looks like I have created some mass confusion.
Figured I'd add, bullet selection is critical.Have to select the one that works for your application.They all have different design parameters, and do their jobs at varying velocities.Chambering don't meant squat without the proper bullet.
A thin jacketed bullet out of a 300 Win Magnum may fragment on impact not penetrating game.A bonded or TSX type bullet out of a .243 will penetrate through game even being light and high velocity.45-70 bullets well make a nice deep hole without being fragmented or high velocity.
You can reference to one of the Nosler reloading manuals where the author used a 300 Win on Alaskan moose and had to use 5 or 6 shots to down the animal and not killing cleanly.The bullets basically blew apart on first impact, so what did energy and velocity do there?
On game performance and good shot placement.Shoot whatever you shoot well.
Figured I'd add, bullet selection is critical.Have to select the one that works for your application.They all have different design parameters, and do their jobs at varying velocities.Chambering don't meant squat without the proper bullet.
A thin jacketed bullet out of a 300 Win Magnum may fragment on impact not penetrating game.A bonded or TSX type bullet out of a .243 will penetrate through game even being light and high velocity.45-70 bullets well make a nice deep hole without being fragmented or high velocity.
You can reference to one of the Nosler reloading manuals where the author used a 300 Win on Alaskan moose and had to use 5 or 6 shots to down the animal and not killing cleanly.The bullets basically blew apart on first impact, so what did energy and velocity do there?
On game performance and good shot placement.Shoot whatever you shoot well.
Think I'll have to put my occupation in my profile, looks like I have created some mass confusion.
Kelly, when I lived in Melfort from '62-'67, I only ever visited Prince Albert once, and came to the conclusion on that trip, that every one from P.A. was a combine pilot! I think 358 BLR has likely passed through P.A. at one time or another, too
Last edited:
I see where your confusion comes from. I misplaced a bracket.I'll try to fix that up for you so you don't break a blood vessel:
Most hunters would be better off with a .260 or (or 7-08 if they are not handloaders) than with a .300 Win Mag.
The comparison simply demonstrates that energy numbers dont' tell the whole story, and your last post was all about comparing energy numbers.
It's funny that you are so hung up on ENERGY but you dont' even know how to properly calculate ENERGY.
Seems that you are not the Ballistic Super genius that you like to portray online! OOPS!
.which delivered behind a proper constructed bullet will always equal more penetration and not just getting inside to have a look around, but destruction of the vitals that brings about a rapid conclusion to your hunt, and not just part 1, with part 2 to take place with your tracker skills in all their glory.
The .300 Winchester Magnum posesses both mass and velocity at all practical NA big game ranges. It is a reliable penetrator and internal destroyer.
The 260 at all NA ranges is marginal at best. It appears that you yourself has advanced in the Ballistics understanding to know that pure energy figures alone don't tell the full story. But you have to remember it is a important part of the killing equation when all other parts are correct. Don't be so naive to reject Energy numbers and try to imagine only a bullet will make a tiny hole broadside.
If you think that just the light hole matters in Game, then I say hang up your 375 Ruger and take 260, it will put a light hole broadside into any animal in NA and yes even the largest bear. Good luck with that one. And with alot less recoil and expense.
I'm done arguing with such foolishness.
Conclusion.
The .260 Remington is not, and never will be a .300 Winchester Magnum when killing large Game. This is the Hunting thread i'm in right?
If you want a nice Deer Rifle out to 300yds or a light precision rig to punch holes in paper out to subsonic range for the cartridge where velocity deteriorates rapidly,the 260 is a nice flat shooter with gentle recoil. By the way the 6.5X55 to a handloader will do this and more and its been around for a million years.
Looking at the dismal amount of factory loads for the 260, I guess a couple of hundred
I see you have begun to understand that energy is only part of the equation. That's some good progress, but you are still somewhat confused about what kills animals, talking about "tiny holes," when talking about a 1.2mm diameter difference on a moose!
Let's keep looking at energy figures since you deem this so important....How is it possible that so many moose have been killed with the .308 (2100-2200 ft/lbs at 100), the 303 British (1950 ft/lbs at 100) the 7x57 (1900 ft/lbs at 100), the .270 Winchester (2000- 2300 ft/lbs at 100) or the 6.5x55 (1900 ft/lbs at 100) but the .260 can't manage to kill anything with 2050 ft/lbs at 100?
(Energy figures from Federal Ammo)
Heck, here is Wayne Van Zwoll killing an elk at 600 yards with a 6.5 CM, which is virtually identical in performance to the .260:
<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/d2COAcHZRlI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
15 seconds after the shot, the elk is down, no tracking job needed.
Not that I would personally take that long a shot, but it demonstrates why shot placement is more important than energy numbers.
I enjoy using all cartridges, big and small. Bigger cartridges open up more options for the hunter, which is one of the appeals they have to me. On dangerous game or really big moose, I'll go with the bigger cartridges if I have an option, but don't kid yourself into thinking that energy numbers are nearly as important as shot placement and bullet construction.
Last edited:
Which was the birth of the Nosler Partition! John Nosler would have been better off with a260 and a 130gr TSX bullet!
x2
It's got nothing to do with occupation and everything to do with location. "Combine Pilot" is just so much easier to say then "Saskatchewanite", orThink I'll have to put my occupation in my profile, looks like I have created some mass confusion.
"Saskatchewanonian" or whatever. I used to call people from Saskatchewan "Stubble Jumpers", but I was corrected by a fellow from Saskatoon who stated:
"If you don't mind, we prefer the term Combine Pilot. Don't you know anything?" So in the interest of harmonious relations with our neighbours, I
corrected the error in my ways.
As for the "radical bunch", it's just my way of saying it was a logical, well tempered response.
RememberTheSomme
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nova Scotia
E=MV/2G
Or at least from my High school physics. It's been a long time but if nit picking is what counts I'll try to make sure everything is as correct as I can make it.
So the 300 guys only get to play with the light varmint bullets that blow up and the 260 guys get the mono's and partitions. Nice equal place to start.
The 300WM has dozens of premium game crushers from all the major manufacturers, where this would only be avaliable to a handloader in the .260.
I see someone chimed in with the .243 in this discussion, I guess it's pretty much opened up to less is always more in the new ballistics classes.
The Elk you described shot with the plate ringer at 600yds, took 15 seconds to die. If a wounded moose shot at 300yds with a 260 can live for at least 15 seconds, it will cover 360 feet at a light trot of 15MPH, thats 120yds, through thick cover here in the east. Alot of animal may get shot at dsisatnce, but the animal themselves espicially white tail try to stay with few leaps of cover. Ever look for a wounded deer in thickets.
If the 260 and the 300 are on the shelf i'll take the latter to insure extra horsepower to take the game I may only be presented with once in the whole season.
I'm sure you are a good hunter and marksman. Maybe your ga,e is taken in the west where the wounded animal would have to cover 2 km's to get out of view.
Here, they disappear very quickly and can be difficult to find without entrance and exit holes.
As to the part that I can't do basic math to determine energy, an attack on me personally, by someone in a discussion over ballistics and Rifle attributes, is not called for. If my arguement has no validity, I would never resort to a personal attack. I've seen it done in face to face encounters and its not pretty. Stick to whats on the table, both sides of the line drwan down the middle where we get to put our ideas, and its all good.
Happy Canada Day! 144 years young.
Was at the range today, nice weather, fired some rifles I haven't had out in years. Leaving the range and locking up on a lovely warm summer evening I thought, is there a better country in the world to live in, really.
I apologize in that I thought I had Gatehouse's post #36 quoted in whole, it appears I did not. Most of this post is in response to his post #36, just above a little.
Or at least from my High school physics. It's been a long time but if nit picking is what counts I'll try to make sure everything is as correct as I can make it.
So the 300 guys only get to play with the light varmint bullets that blow up and the 260 guys get the mono's and partitions. Nice equal place to start.
The 300WM has dozens of premium game crushers from all the major manufacturers, where this would only be avaliable to a handloader in the .260.
I see someone chimed in with the .243 in this discussion, I guess it's pretty much opened up to less is always more in the new ballistics classes.
The Elk you described shot with the plate ringer at 600yds, took 15 seconds to die. If a wounded moose shot at 300yds with a 260 can live for at least 15 seconds, it will cover 360 feet at a light trot of 15MPH, thats 120yds, through thick cover here in the east. Alot of animal may get shot at dsisatnce, but the animal themselves espicially white tail try to stay with few leaps of cover. Ever look for a wounded deer in thickets.
If the 260 and the 300 are on the shelf i'll take the latter to insure extra horsepower to take the game I may only be presented with once in the whole season.
I'm sure you are a good hunter and marksman. Maybe your ga,e is taken in the west where the wounded animal would have to cover 2 km's to get out of view.
Here, they disappear very quickly and can be difficult to find without entrance and exit holes.
As to the part that I can't do basic math to determine energy, an attack on me personally, by someone in a discussion over ballistics and Rifle attributes, is not called for. If my arguement has no validity, I would never resort to a personal attack. I've seen it done in face to face encounters and its not pretty. Stick to whats on the table, both sides of the line drwan down the middle where we get to put our ideas, and its all good.
Happy Canada Day!
144 years young.Was at the range today, nice weather, fired some rifles I haven't had out in years. Leaving the range and locking up on a lovely warm summer evening I thought, is there a better country in the world to live in, really.
I apologize in that I thought I had Gatehouse's post #36 quoted in whole, it appears I did not. Most of this post is in response to his post #36, just above a little.
- Location
- Prince Albert, Sk
I read this one somewhere.............maybe it can help.
E=MC2 , energy = mass multiplied by velocity / squared.
hehehe
Like I understand Einstein
For the record I did make it to the range also to celebrate Canada Day.
To stay on topic, I was using my necked up .260 today, still working well.
E=MC2 , energy = mass multiplied by velocity / squared.
hehehe
Like I understand Einstein
For the record I did make it to the range also to celebrate Canada Day.
To stay on topic, I was using my necked up .260 today, still working well.
It's funny that you are so hung up on ENERGY but you dont' even know how to properly calculate ENERGY.
