« civil war? seems more probable than not, to my way of thinking. | Main | the "impeachment" "process" turns into a comedy of errors and miscalculations ... the only question is, how low will the demo's sink ... »

October 10, 2019

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Drew458

Sadly I don't think there are any lethality studies at 400 meters. And there isn't much volley firing at 1200 yards in the military anymore. Nearly all rifle combat is at under 300 yards. For a reason! Without a good scope, can you even see a human target at that range, or get iron sites on target in the second or two you can safely stick up your head, aim and shoot, and not get shot yourself? Without a doubt, larger bullets make bigger holes, but usually take longer to get to those far targets. (extreme 19th century example:) Look at the .577/450 Martini-Henry. 480 grains of 20:1 lead at 1350fps. Double the energy of a .44 Magnum. Hit anything and it puts a fist sized hole out the back. Utterly lethal. But it takes all morning to get to the target, and the recoil has got to be severe. Same goes for 500 grains of .45-70 at about the same velocity and lead alloy. Kills the Indian and the horse he's riding, if he's still in the neighborhood by the time the bullet gets out there to 900 yards or so.

Maybe the answer is to give up the "Geneva Conventions" which we aren't even a signer of, and go back to bullets that actually work. A .243 hunting bullet can drop a deer on the spot at 400 yards, if it goes where you aim it. But FMJ is not a hunting bullet. It's a fool's projectile IMO.

It's a conundrum, I'll admit, but 110 grains of 24 caliber beats 70 grains of 22 caliber. Sure, 250 grains of 35 caliber beats them both, but pounds the daylights out of the shooter after about 8 shots. Or less.

john jay

drew:

actually, 400 grains at app. 1250-1300 per second out of a remington rolling block is a pretty mild load. not unpleasant at all.

on a good day, with the sun at you back, you can see the bullet approaching a 600 yard gong at a pretty high angle of attack out of a relatively good spotting scope.

and, a good shot w/ the vernier sight (made of steel, naturally), can be quite accurate, ... , but, you must know the range, and dial the sight in.

you are right about the speed of things .... a modern optic is very quick and quite serviceable to 300 to 400 yards or so, ... , ringing a 300 yard gong, say 10" in diameter, is not overly tough. from a bench, knowing the distance, and not being shot at. no anxiety there.

actually, taking a fmj round nose bullet in the kisser or in the chest is quite lethal, especially one of 30+ caliber or so ... it may not sound like much, but, a 150 grain bullet of such construction at 2200+ fps or so, is quite destructive on soft body organisms.

john

Drew458

It continues to amaze me just how far ahead of it's time the .280 Brit was. Not just years, but generations.

The current darling cartridge of the bench rest shooting fraternity is the 6mm Dasher, which is an "improved" version of the 6mm BR. Aside from the caliber difference, the Dasher's dimensions are nearly identical to the .280 Brit. A hair less body taper, a body just 4/100ths longer, case length 0.14" shorter ... which means the Dasher is a short necked round. There is another flavor of it with a slightly longer neck which is better if you use a variety of bullets, without increasing OAL. Norma makes this as factory brass. My bet is Norma's case length is within a thou or two of the Brit's. The Dasher shoots one hole groups at >300m.

So what this means is that shortly after WWII the English developed a highly efficient mid-powered military cartridge with astounding accuracy potential. 70 years later and the target shooting world is in love with a minor variation of it. Awesome.

john jay

drew:

agreed. agreed. agreed. and, agreed.

a great cartridge. and, we can view the 7mm-08 rem as a "magnum" version. and, yes, i like the .284 caliber, very much.

john

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)