Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
25-06 to 264 win mag
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wildcat455" data-source="post: 1471177" data-attributes="member: 102653"><p>I find so much wrong with what you just wrote, Patton243, I'm not sure where to begin. Truly, a collection of words bordering on ignorant.</p><p></p><p>"Consensus" isn't fact, it's a general opinion of many people. People are biased by what they know AND what they think they know.</p><p></p><p>I base my conclusions on facts, Not other people's opinions or consensus. Opinions and consensus can be wrong. Facts aren't.</p><p>Some conclusions of fact change when new data is introduced.</p><p></p><p>Just to be clear and accurate, The 264 isn't "based off the 7mm mag necked down". It's parent case is the 375 Holland & Holland, and it was released in 1958, 4 years before the 7mm mag.</p><p></p><p>The rest of your post is littered with speculation, assumptions, generalizations, and your opinion, the latter of which is ok, but only for you, and anyone willing to accept it and your set of requirements or parameters. I am not attacking you here personally, just your collection of words and their arrangement to represent something other than what they are.</p><p>Therefore, I will not be addressing any of those statements directly here.</p><p></p><p>A 264 win mag is considered overbore. That is a fact.</p><p>What makes any cartridge overbore is the relationship between powder capacity and bore size.</p><p>Where the line is drawn for overbore is subjective.</p><p>Some draw it at 1000, I draw it at 1300.</p><p></p><p>What makes any cartridge a "Barrel Burner" has more to do with how it is used and fed, and a disregard for the inherent design of the cartridge.</p><p>In other words, ignorance of facts, or improper conclusions drawn from data, and applied in a practice.</p><p></p><p>If anyone is inclined to treat things without respect, intelligence and knowledge, the resulting experience will be negative.</p><p></p><p>Modern slow burning powders have improved since the 1960's and 1970's, but apparently, opinions have not been adjusted accordingly. Parroting conclusions based on out of date data, personal bias, propaganda, etc. is wrong, and proliferates the status quo of ignorance.</p><p></p><p>Here are some overbore ratios for some long range cartridges just for reference:</p><p></p><p>300 win mag 1282</p><p>7mm rem mag 1326</p><p>300 norma 1418</p><p>264 win mag 1424</p><p>50 BMG 1480</p><p>300 RUM 1527</p><p>28 nosler 1581</p><p>26 nosler 1730</p><p>30/378 Wthby. 1813</p><p></p><p>If a man chose to educate himself, research data, and apply what he has learned, he can successfully use a tool in a manner that is not abusive to the design of that tool.</p><p></p><p>I have more, but I've spent too much time on this already .</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wildcat455, post: 1471177, member: 102653"] I find so much wrong with what you just wrote, Patton243, I'm not sure where to begin. Truly, a collection of words bordering on ignorant. "Consensus" isn't fact, it's a general opinion of many people. People are biased by what they know AND what they think they know. I base my conclusions on facts, Not other people's opinions or consensus. Opinions and consensus can be wrong. Facts aren't. Some conclusions of fact change when new data is introduced. Just to be clear and accurate, The 264 isn't "based off the 7mm mag necked down". It's parent case is the 375 Holland & Holland, and it was released in 1958, 4 years before the 7mm mag. The rest of your post is littered with speculation, assumptions, generalizations, and your opinion, the latter of which is ok, but only for you, and anyone willing to accept it and your set of requirements or parameters. I am not attacking you here personally, just your collection of words and their arrangement to represent something other than what they are. Therefore, I will not be addressing any of those statements directly here. A 264 win mag is considered overbore. That is a fact. What makes any cartridge overbore is the relationship between powder capacity and bore size. Where the line is drawn for overbore is subjective. Some draw it at 1000, I draw it at 1300. What makes any cartridge a "Barrel Burner" has more to do with how it is used and fed, and a disregard for the inherent design of the cartridge. In other words, ignorance of facts, or improper conclusions drawn from data, and applied in a practice. If anyone is inclined to treat things without respect, intelligence and knowledge, the resulting experience will be negative. Modern slow burning powders have improved since the 1960's and 1970's, but apparently, opinions have not been adjusted accordingly. Parroting conclusions based on out of date data, personal bias, propaganda, etc. is wrong, and proliferates the status quo of ignorance. Here are some overbore ratios for some long range cartridges just for reference: 300 win mag 1282 7mm rem mag 1326 300 norma 1418 264 win mag 1424 50 BMG 1480 300 RUM 1527 28 nosler 1581 26 nosler 1730 30/378 Wthby. 1813 If a man chose to educate himself, research data, and apply what he has learned, he can successfully use a tool in a manner that is not abusive to the design of that tool. I have more, but I've spent too much time on this already . [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
25-06 to 264 win mag
Top