260 rem vs 308 win

Ballistically, there is no comparison between the 260 and the 308. The 6.5 is far superior at any range. So is the 7-08.

Now busting things is another story and the 308 has the bigger bullet SOOOOOO.....I would suggest the 708 as the best replacement.

When the US govt decides to change their battle cartridge, we will know what the new tactical cartridge will be. for now, it is the 308.

Odds are it will be a 270 as the thought of using a Euro cal rubs the US brass the wrong way. Or else we would all be using a 7mm Brit rd. from the 50's and not have bothered with the 308/223/6.8SPC. Our soldiers would have been a lot happier.
Jerry
 
a 270 NATO cartridge would go a long way towards increasing the availability of .277 match bullets.

Just the same, I'd prefer to see a 7mm. I agree that the 7mm08 is about the most ideal use of the 308 case, providing the best balance between ultra-high BC VLD bullets and muzzle velocity. Incedentally, do you know where I might find a reliable supply of .284 162gr AMAX bullets?
 
6mmbr.com has an article on the 260 ackley improved and trajectory
and impact velocity is way better than a 308.
 
prosper, Higginson, Wholesale, SIR and Russels usually carry stock of the 162gr Amax.

Without reducing the case a snick (300Savage size), there will be increased throat wear. I am sure that is a big reason a 6mm SAW didn't make it into production.

The smaller cals offer much better ballistics but they also increase throat erosion. For us target shooters, no issue. If the mean rate of wear exceeds desired limits in say a machine gun, bean counters get all out of joint. Plus troops don't like carrying spare barrels much.

If you can dig up the info, look at the once proposed 7mm Brit (or whatever it was called) back with the 7.62NATO. I believe is it very similar to an oversized 7BR/PPC similar to a 7 - 22/250. Can't find my links.

That would have pushed a 150 to 165gr bullet around 2300 to 2500fps (sound familiar). Did use a different case head then the 30-06 but that wouldn't have mattered as there was a full design of all platforms anyway.

Would definitely have worked in a shorter barrel assualt rifle, plenty powerful for a SAW, and even moderate range sniper rd with similar/better ballistics then the 308 does today.

If the 6.5/7mm does make it today, that would be a major coup and show some maturity on the US planners side. Me thinks 270 will be as close as they come in a one size fit all cartridge. Doesn't look like that is going to be happening anytime soon either.

Jerry
 
prosper, that's it. The 276 Pederson IS the 7mm that I am thinking off. Euros like to use the land diameter, not the groove diameter common to us.

Any chance you would still have the cartridge info - size, dimensions?

Jerry
 
Google.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.276_Pedersen

The .276 Pedersen round was an experimental 7 mm cartridge developed for John Pedersen's Pedersen rifle, a competitor to the M1 Garand Rifle (neither are technically related to the Pedersen device).

Developed in 1923 by the United States, it was intended to replace the .30-06 Springfield in new semiautomatic rifles and machine guns. When first recommended for adoption, M1 Garand rifles were chambered for the .276 Pedersen, which held ten rounds in its unique en-bloc clips. The .276 Pedersen was a shorter, lighter and lower pressure round than the .30-06, which made the design of an autoloading rifle easier than the long, powerful .30-06. The US Army Chief of Staff Gen. Douglas MacArthur rejected the .276 Pedersen Garand in 1932 after verifying that a .30-06 version was feasible. Because of the factors of Depression era budgets, existing tooling and stockpiles, a caliber change was probably ill advised.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom