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
Improving the 308 Win performance
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="Chad Erickson" data-source="post: 2738902" data-attributes="member: 122822"><p>I enjoyed your analysis of the .308's energy vs velocity.</p><p></p><p>Every time one analyzes any .30 caliber ballistics, as you superbly did here, an amazing phenomena appears: The maximum yardage at which the 1800 ft/sec minimum requirement for expansion is reached, it matches the maximum yardage at which the 1300 ft/lb minimum requirement for elk is reached. If you go to a larger caliber, surplus energy is wasted, and if you go to a smaller caliber, surplus velocity is wasted. This phenomena of efficiency probably explains why our military doggedly held to the .30 caliber for its weapons for 70 years, whereas most all of Europe and Japan had gone to the .264. However, in the .264 caliber the same performance can be accomplished with 20% less recoil, even though some of the velocity is lost in the analisis. </p><p></p><p>And the .264 is about the lowest limit for good performance. Go to .243 or .223 and you just get a mouth full of feathers. Take the 6mm Creedmoor, where for the first 300 yards you have too high of a destructive velocity and after 380 yards there is not enough energy left to penetrate an elk.</p><p></p><p>Going the other direction, the yardage at which the .338 Win. Magnum's velocity hits the critical 1800 ft/sec, is less than the yardage for the 7mm Remington Magnum, with 45% more recoil. All the surplus energy and recoil of the .338 is wasted.</p><p></p><p>Comparing the .338 Win. Mag. to the 6.8 Western, with its "large for caliber" bullets, the 6.8 Western nearly matches the .338's 1800ft/sec threshold, with 62% less recoil.</p><p></p><p>Yes, I know these are "just numbers". However, with "numbers" we can design and build ten or twenty new rigs for comparison, with little cost or time. And to say that these are just numbers is to dismiss the Engineering profession that has designed our vast array of structures, before they were built.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chad Erickson, post: 2738902, member: 122822"] I enjoyed your analysis of the .308's energy vs velocity. Every time one analyzes any .30 caliber ballistics, as you superbly did here, an amazing phenomena appears: The maximum yardage at which the 1800 ft/sec minimum requirement for expansion is reached, it matches the maximum yardage at which the 1300 ft/lb minimum requirement for elk is reached. If you go to a larger caliber, surplus energy is wasted, and if you go to a smaller caliber, surplus velocity is wasted. This phenomena of efficiency probably explains why our military doggedly held to the .30 caliber for its weapons for 70 years, whereas most all of Europe and Japan had gone to the .264. However, in the .264 caliber the same performance can be accomplished with 20% less recoil, even though some of the velocity is lost in the analisis. And the .264 is about the lowest limit for good performance. Go to .243 or .223 and you just get a mouth full of feathers. Take the 6mm Creedmoor, where for the first 300 yards you have too high of a destructive velocity and after 380 yards there is not enough energy left to penetrate an elk. Going the other direction, the yardage at which the .338 Win. Magnum's velocity hits the critical 1800 ft/sec, is less than the yardage for the 7mm Remington Magnum, with 45% more recoil. All the surplus energy and recoil of the .338 is wasted. Comparing the .338 Win. Mag. to the 6.8 Western, with its "large for caliber" bullets, the 6.8 Western nearly matches the .338's 1800ft/sec threshold, with 62% less recoil. Yes, I know these are "just numbers". However, with "numbers" we can design and build ten or twenty new rigs for comparison, with little cost or time. And to say that these are just numbers is to dismiss the Engineering profession that has designed our vast array of structures, before they were built. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Improving the 308 Win performance
Top