the king of calibers

It's ok... I wish my 308 Savage 12fv were chambered in 6.5CM instead...

>>31095183
Why? What advantage would that have?

>>31094819
Trying to claim that any caliber is the best is always going to be flawed, as people value traits differently. What is the best caliber for your priories, is not likely to the best for someone else's priorities.

Furthermore, trying to state what is going to the best without giving a specific job you are going to do has always seemed remarkably pointless to me. It will always boil down to opinion, memes, personal preference and other such bullshit.

To conclude, your thread blows, and you should never make a thread again.

>>31095295
>Trying to claim that any caliber is the best is always going to be flawed, as people value traits differently. What is the best caliber for your priories, is not likely to the best for someone else's priorities.
That's why he's saying .308 is best, because it's pretty decent at everything.

>>31095300
Which for people who prioritize specialization means nothing.

>>31095183

At the ranges and sizes I hunt in North America, I have nothing to complain about on anything between the 6.5 to the 7.62 cartridges. They all fo what I need them to.

But I'll always have that special snowflake love for 7mm-08 because she was my first.

6.5 Swede
Any other answer is wrong.

>>31095327
I love 6.5x55, but fanboys should always be gassed.

>>31095304
It is better to have one general purpose rifle that can kill anything in North America than a safe full of guns that each do one specific job well.

>>31095327
I know Swedes use it for moose, but remember that they use ridiculously long for caliber bullets. 30 caliber is better for large game.

>>31094819
>not 7.62x54r
Kys senpai

>>31095333
>fanboys of actually good shit are the same as fanboys of average shit
no

>>31094819
I agree. If there was ever a more middle of the road rifle cal. I have yet to see it.

>>31094819
This sounds like you plagerized it.

>>31095350
>It is better to have one general purpose rifle

What you have said is true for you. It would not be true for someone who wants the gun that can do a specific job best. You must wrap your head around the idea that what you look for in a weapon is not what everyone else looks for.

>>31095355
please gas yourself.

>>31094819
I prefer 7.62x54R.

File: prod_gal_10519_CsDGjH_large.jpg (588KB, 1380x920px) Image search: [Google]

588KB, 1380x920px

>>31095350
>but remember that they use ridiculously long for caliber bullets
yeah, so what? is using the bullet weight the round was actually designed for now considered cheating?

>30 caliber is better for large game.
the difference in diameter is a whopping .044 inches.

>>31095693
Long bullets are generally better for penetrating flesh as well.

>>31095350
It kinda depends on what you're hunting. If the 6.5 doesn't have enought Joule to be able to hunt something we usually use 9.3x64

>>31095354
came here to say this

>>31094819
Naw, it's 8mm Mauser

>best for NA
Are there any .308 or 6.5 Swede loads suitable for Polar Bear?

File: stop.jpg (25KB, 364x302px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 364x302px

>>31095400
>You must wrap your head around the idea that what you look for in a weapon is not what everyone else looks for.
CANT. HURTS BRAIN

>>31095350
>safe full of guns
But the notion of having a .308 in that safe is weird to you? You can have a .308 or several and still think it isn't the best cartridge. In a CQB situation .308 PDW is overkill and will hold less ammo. Not only will the gun hold less ammo and be heavier, but you'll be able to carry less mags. A giant ass battle rifle isn't great for that, so you would need multiple rifles or uppers for a .308 AR lower. A .308 PDW won't be great for making long shots either. The short barrel won't give you the extra oomph at a distance, which is the whole purpose of using a .308 in the first place.

>>31095898
That's because you're retarded.

>>31094819
Different calibers do different things... to say one is the best is stupid.

>>31095295
keep walking nerd, this is a big guy thread

File: foghorn-leghorn-its-a-joke.png (250KB, 640x465px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 640x465px

>>31095910
>He took the bait
just like shootin fish inna barrel

>>31095945
yup

>>31095693
>the difference in diameter is a whopping .044 inches.
But remember that area=pi*r^2. The 308 has 36% more impact area.

There's nothing wrong with using a ridiculously long, skinny bullet as long as you do two things:
1. use a bullet that will expand enough to compensate for your lack of impact area
2. Since the bullet will be fairly slow out of the muzzle and even slower downrange, use a bullet that will expand even at low impact velocity.
But if you are going to do that anyway, you may as well use a shorter, fatter bullet like a 308 in the same weight as what you would use in a 6.5x55mm.

>>31095764
That's a good caliber, but it's overkill for anything weighing less than 400 kg. Instead of having both, it is more convenient to have a 308 you can use on anything from foxes to moose.

>>31095864
A great cartridge, but sadly hard to find in America.

>>31095881
I don't know why you would want to kill polar bears in the first place, but 308 with a 165 grain bonded bullet should kill them just as dead as it kills elk.

File: ranger-rifle-sized-ref1.jpg (89KB, 620x465px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 620x465px

>>31095992
the Canucki Arctic Rangers are phasing out their .303 Enfields for a bolt .308. The new weapon is a Sako, but produced under license by Colt. Looks like a nice rifle.

>>31095992
>8x57
>hard to find

Only if you are literally retarded and confine your search to walmarts, yes.

>>31095910
As the person that gentleman was responding too, I think you are the retarded one for acknowledging him in an way.

>>31095992
>But if you are going to do that anyway, you may as well use a shorter, fatter bullet like a 308 in the same weight as what you would use in a 6.5x55mm.
why should I?

>>31096075
It is hard to find with premium bullet constructions.
>>31096080
I don't think you understood me. The reason we use expanding bullets is to increase impact area. Using a bigger bore furthers that goal.

>>31096118

Nice job moving the goal posts there. Anyways, that is a fairly meaningless statement. What does premium mean? I can't find Lapua SPBTs in .308 at my LGS, does that mean it is hard to find too? Or do you just mean any hunting bullet? Because federal and hornady 8mm is pretty easy to find.

>>31096150
Premium means
>Of a commodity, service, etc.: superior in quality and therefore commanding a higher price. Of a price: suited to an item of superior quality; higher than usual. Of an establishment: producing or selling products of superior quality.

>>31095992
On 8mm, I think that's a good point I'm just saying theoretically and scientifically it's much better than the 308 or 30-06. It's simply a superior cartridge to either one.

File: partywan.jpg (57KB, 486x431px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 486x431px

>>31096212

0/10 missed the entire point.

premium can be construed to several different levels of real or perceived quality. I pointed this out with my examples to bring to light the fact that OP is a faggot.

>>31094819

72gr 5.56 is the king of calibers.

>>31096118
so ny your logic .416 SAR is better than .308.

>>31096221
>I'm just saying that in my opinion is it much better

Fixed that for you mate. 8mm is basically identical in performance to 30-06. The only meaningful difference is a very small change in diameter (which adds a pro and a con to each caliber) and personal preference for long as fuck cases or fat as fuck cases.

>>31096252
8x57 also had a superior bullet with superior long-range performance in its military loading.

>>31096252
btw, the .30-06 case is based on the 7x57 case, which in turn is based on the 8x57 case. the dimensions of .30-06 and 8x57 are virtually identical below the shoulder.

So what's better for distance shooting 6.5 creedmoor, or .458 socom?

File: iquit.gif (2MB, 360x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x270px

>>31096274
>in this one loading it is better in my opinion

wow it's fucking nothing. Furthermore, you say "its military loading" as if 8mm and 30-06 only had a single military loading. As opposed to each having dozens due to being in a shitload of different military firearms and used by many different countries.

Honestly I can't tell if you are a child or if this is bait. If it is bait, I salute you because I'm fucking salty.

>>31094819
308 Win sucks by any possible measure. 7-08 crushes it, as does 6.5 Creed, and does 243 Win...all on the same case.

Ballistic and terminal performance is about bullets, not headstamps, and 7mm, 6.5mm, and 6mm have far better bullets available at a lower cost than 7.62mm.

The only 7.62mm bullet that is close to competitive is the 155 Scenar, but it is pretty salty at $0.35945 per bullet compared to, say, a 162 AMax that outperforms it at $0.2785 per bullet.

>but I don't reload
6.5 Creed factory fodder handily spanks 308 Win's. And learn to reload you limber dick.

>>31096319
Is limber really the word you wanted there?

>>31096330
limp

Not sure how it came to be limber but thank you for the careful reading.

File: image.jpg (67KB, 425x500px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 425x500px

>>31096314
>getting mad over facts on the internet
oookaaay...

>>31096238
Better in terms of impact area, but a bullet that big will not have a very good trajectory unless it has a whole lot of powder behind it.

>>31096319
Those calibers may have slightly flatter trajectories, but at any reasonable distance, it will not make a significant difference in point of impact. More important is a big bullet that can be depended on to kill big game.

>>31096401
so a slender bullet that opens up sufficiently is actually the best? okay, we're back to 6.5.

>>31096399
You keep using the term facts, I'm pretty sure you really don't have a firm handle on what the word "facts" entails.

Cool picture though.

I'm a sucker for .22-06 flat ballistics great velocity all I need in a gun

>>31096252
M2 ball is supremely inferior to the s.S Patrone loading. The 7.92 had a G7 BC of .295. Compare that to the G7 of M2 ball at .210 and it's clear to see that the 8mm had better ballistics in a slightly shorter case, which used a different neck profile so that bullets were seated long thus allowing more of the powder capacity of the 12mm based case to be used than was achievable in the .30-06. Velocity with these 196 grain profectile from a KAR 98k was around 2500, and with the M2 around 2800. While I don't think the 8mm completely whoops the pants off the .30-06, I think it's a superior design that allowed for easier accuracy at longer ranges that the '06 was capable of, and could be produced more efficiently because you didn't need as much material to make cartridge casings as you did with the .30-06

>>31096417
No. As a general rule of thumb, use the fattest bullet with a sufficiently flat trajectory at reasonable ranges, which we shall define as ranges beyond which the average marksman's group size, under field conditions, are larger than the vital zone of his target. The 308 fits this bill very well, though the 338 federal is a good contender.

>>31095864
>8mm Mauser
>Not the objectively superior 7mm Mauser

>>31096483
so 9.3x62 is the best? gotcha.

>>31096520
I like 7mm Mauser too. Just a lot less good loadings out there for it unless you're willing to fuck with slow burning powders that aren't written about in manuals because they're worried you'll blow up some ancient 1890s Spanish Mauser.

>>31096462
Someone on /k/ said 8mm Mauser required more materials to make than any other cartridge of the war. Dunno if that's true.

Was 8mm hindered as a sniping round in WWII due to the Germans using carbines?

>>31096553
In terms, of killing power, yes, 9.3x62 would be far better than 308, but most people couldn't handle that kind of recoil, making it impractical for your average hunter.

>>31096462
I have a hard time arguing with that. I will still point out that comparing two military loadings, made for the limitations of specific rifles, does not inherently make one cartridge better than another.

When loaded in the modern day for modern rifles, anything 8mm can do 30-06 can do, and anything 30-06 can do 8mm can do.

To address your theory that 30-06 is less efficient to produce, I do not know enough about that process to be able to tell you either way. However, if it is true, we can chalk that up in favor of 8mm. Then however we must remember that 30-06 is a thinner cartridge, allowing for smaller magazines, and that it is (again generally) marginally lighter than 8mm.

I really just don't understand the desire to say one caliber is better than the other when they are really so very similar. It seems that any preference will come more from personal appeal to the history/rifles than from measurable difference between the calibers.

File: wehraboo.jpg (124KB, 988x688px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 988x688px

>>31096462
>M2 ball is supremely inferior to the s.S Patrone loading
Wehraboo detected.

Also, modern factory 8x57 ammo has ballistics about like the 30-30 because ammo companies are afraid somebody will use it in his opa's old rifle and blow it up.

>>31096624

factory 30-06 is loaded weak, and the garand can't even shoot full power 30-06 without breaking so......

>>31096401
How is a flatter trajectory not an advantage?

FYI - if you shot enough to not be in over your head you'd know trajectory is easy, wind calls ain't.

>bigger bullet
Bigger, both in terms of diameter and mass, doesn't mean shit. Bullet integrity and impact velocity are far and away more important factors in killing, and 308 Win gets smashed in both regards by 7mm, 6.5mm, and 6mm.

>>31096588
is your average hunter a little faggot?

>>31096588
So instead of making a real argument, like that 9.3 is overkill for most animals or will be poor for meat quality, you shit the bed and claim it is too hard hitting for people to handle it?

What?

>>31095354
>rims
Yeah no.

>>31096612
>30-06 is a thinner cartridge
but that's wrong.

>>31094819
what vidya contains the best, most satisfying .308 shootan?

>>31096678
I went and checked, you are correct, I was wrong on that point.

My b mang.

>>31096588
Name your favorite 9.3mm bullet, for killing.

When I am done laughing I'll clue you in as to why you are retarded.

>>31096669
It's not a claim, it's a fact that most people don't want something with recoil comparable to a 375 H&H.

>>31096651
>How is a flatter trajectory not an advantage?
Because changing the point of impact by an inch is not going to matter on an animal with an 8 inch vital zone. At the distance where bullet drop becomes significant, field group size (as distinct from benchrest group size) will be too large anyway. This is known as the morning glory effect.

>FYI - if you shot enough to not be in over your head you'd know trajectory is easy, wind calls ain't.
308 drifts less than an inch at 100 yard with a 10 mph crosswind. That is not enough to matter.

>>31096729
Swift A-Frame.

File: 20160805_201849.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

>>31096759
Because as we all know, no heavy recoiling big bore cartridges are popular amongst hunters.

>>31096624
Actually I'm more of an Ivan lover. You're just a fucktard.

>>31096800
What cartridges are those?

>>31096835
3 35rems, 2 45-70s.

The 35rems are more or less just there because they were in the pic with my 45-70.

>>31096846
45-70 isn't very popular anymore. Even with smokeless powder, it's very slow.

>>31095266
Better at taking wind and stuff than 308

>>31096880
It is stocked at every LGS or chain gun store I have ever been too.

If you think it isn't fairly popular, you are a fucking delusional faggot. Is it as common as 556? No. Is it still regularly used to take game in NA? Very yes.

The only thing that is very slow here is your fucking brain OP.

>>31096759
I thought we were talking about which chambering was better than another? I've yet to see you cite an advantage that 308 Win offers over 7-08, 6.5 Creed, or 243 Win.

Thus far you've cited its shortcomings but claimed they 'don't matter' with your oh-so-long 100 yard shot. For conversation I shoot all of the above and then some at well beyond 100 yards, and in my actual shooting of the I find that at 500 yards my pet 308 Win load (155 Scenar @ 3000 fps) drops just over 35" from a 300 yard zero and drifts 7.5 inches. In contrast my 105 BTHP @ 3000 fps load drops 26" and drifts 6" at same.

For the math challenged that is 9" less drop and 1.5" less drift, which greedily take along with less recoil and an additional 50 fps impact velocity. It gets uglier, the further down range it goes,

>not 7x57
>anything under .243
You're all fucking gay.

>>31096880
There are 1500+FPS loads for 450-grain projectiles out of .45-70, if you have a modern Marlin or a Ruger No.1. What the actual fuck are you hunting that that's not good enough? Ankylosaurus?

>>31096910
It's still stocked, yes, but few rifles are sold in it compared to rifles sold in bottlenecked cartridges. When you compare the ballistics, it's easy to see why.

>>31096903
That really only matters at distances beyond which the ordinary hunter would shoot anything.

>>31096963
>few rifles are sold in it compared to rifles sold in bottlenecked cartridges
Few by model maybe. Marlins fucking FLY off the shelves in every caliber where I live.

File: trudat.png (529KB, 658x960px) Image search: [Google]

529KB, 658x960px

>>31096963
You are such a fucking moron. You have made a little mental bubble for yourself and refuse to acknowledge anything outside it.

Of course one straight walled rifle caliber sells less than all rifles chambered in bottleneck cartridges, you turnip of a human being. This does not make 45-70 unpopular. If it was unpopular, there wouldn't currently be multiple companies making rifles in it, and most major ammo companies wouldn't be making load for it.

I am extremely convinced that you are one of two things. 1. Very, very stupid. 2. an 18 year old who bought a rifle in 308, and as it is his only rifle, feels that it must be the best rifle ever, and refuses to acknowledge anything else.

Mcfucking kill yourself

>>31096948
>1500 fps

You shoot those you want to wait a little bit before you walk downrange to check your target, so the bullet doesn't hit you on its way in.

>>31096930
>I've yet to see you cite an advantage that 308 Win offers over 7-08, 6.5 Creed, or 243 Win
Bullet size and weight. Can the aforementioned smaller calibers kill large game like elk? Yes, and a 7 oz hammer can drive a 16 penny nail, but it's not the best tool for the job.

>in my actual shooting of the I find that at 500 yards
You were shooting from a a bipod in the prone position or from a benchrest, weren't you? Under real-life field conditions (think sitting or kneeling position without a benchrest), a shot at that range would be absurdly impractical. You would have to get closer to the target. The maximum realistic range is about 150 yards.

>>31096963
What distance does the average hunter shoot things, in your imagination?

And how does what works all right for those people, determine what is 'king'?

>>31097034
I don't have data on calibers by popularity, but I would guess that 45-70 is pretty far down on the list.

>>31096948
That's entering handgun range velocities. Your trajectory will be like a rainbow.

>>31097082
>What distance does the average hunter shoot things, in your imagination?
Most shots are taken within 125 yards. Most of those that are not could have been if the hunter had been willing to walk or crawl a little closer.

>>31097052
Lmfao.

>>31097094
Hilarious.

>>31097071
>maximum realistic range of 7/08, 6.5 creed, and .243 is 150 yards
Yeah, if helen keller is behind the trigger.

File: NSlopeBull.jpg (396KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 1024x768px

>>31097071
Bullet size (assuming you mean diameter) and weight are meaningless designators when it comes to killing things.

Bullet integrity and impact velocity, along with shot placement, are the overwhelmingly significant factors.

How many Elk have you shot with 0.243" bullets that walked away? Note the bullet and impact velocity. I've yet to have that happen despite my primary hunting rifle being a 243AI. Elk ain't at all hard to kill, big vitals easily reached.

Here is a moose I booked this spring. 105 HPBT delivered via 243AI at about 240 yards. Not like I don't have a 308 Win I coulda brought.

>>31096930
I can help you out on the .243..308 can take down elk too.

File: IMG_1283.jpg (95KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1024x768px

>>31097132
>125 yards

Where'd you get that number and what do you hunt?

Please relate how you'd sneak up on either of these guys.

>>31097168
I don't care how flat your trajectory is: you are still going to have a certain amount of natural tremor. You obviously shoot from a benchrest. Try shooting at that distance off your knee, and you'll begin to see my point.

>>31097181
>using a coyote round on a half ton animal.
People like you are the reason why states have minimal legal calibers.

>>31097232
Those are exceptional conditions, not the norm.

File: Jagsfan.jpg (38KB, 615x346px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 615x346px

>>31097251
>mfw swedes use 6.5 swede to hunt moose regularly
>mfw this nigger actually believes max rifle hunting range is 150 yards
have you tried not being a terrible shot?

File: 7,62x54mmR_Mosin_Nagant.jpg (56KB, 1024x276px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1024x276px

How is this cartridge for hunting?

>>31097251
>half ton

He went better than that. The bullet went through his front shoulder, one lung and his heart and was dug out under the off side skin. I expected a pass through, but not quite.

Alaska doesn't have minimum caliber on moose, mainly because people here know what they are doing by having done it. In direct opposition to the retard crew the ADFG will tell you to use what you can shoot and pick a good bullet, rather than get wrapped up in fluff like diameter and weight and powder burned. They do limit rimfires for big game to swimming caribou and that might be sensible.

Post some pics of the moose you've killed. Or elks.

>>31097354
somewhere between .308 and .30-06. so, adequate.

File: IMG_1304.jpg (190KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1024x768px

>>31097301
I'm at east in being exceptional and choose the tools requisite.

Here is what the one in the back looks like up close, in case you are curious. Not having to guess at this shit or believe in wives tales is a luxury I afford myself.

>>31097336
Point of order: the minimum loading for big game is that big long 160-grain bastard. For polar bear as well.

Point of order #2: that loading accounts for one third the meese taken in all three Scandi countries plus Finland. No idea about polar bear.

>>31097412
its still a very similar amount of energy being transferred. anons dead moose says .243 works great assuming you choose the correct projectile and put it where it needs to be.

>>31097354
How is this cartridge for defending my bunker from riotous brown people and cheeki breeki bandits?

>>31097132
You're pretty far down on the evolutionary tree you fucking Homo Erectus piece of shit.

>>31097474
It is very nice, 10/10

>>31096846
Would be great to make a nice 7mm intermediate cartridge out of that

>>31097454
>.243
What kinda bullet?

>>31097564
i dont hunt moose. i was talking about >>31097181

youd have to ask him which projectile

>>31097251
>benchrest
I've personally used my 7x57 (which is a ballistic twin of the 7/08) to take deer at 314, 367, and 478 yards.

All dropped in their tracks and never moved again. 140 gr nosler partition @ 2600fps.

Kill yourself.

>>31097600
Pls stop responding to the tripfag. We don't do that here.

>>31097564
Hornady 105 BTHP for the moose in >>31097181

For >>31097393 I was using a rifle with a factory 10" twist barrel that won't stabilize the 105, so it was a 90 grain Lapua Scenar that did it.

>>31096462
Fantastic post, I love /k/

>>31096572
>Was 8mm hindered as a sniping round in WWII due to the Germans using carbines?
The k98 family in use during the war was almost a DMR role due to the Wehrmacht's reliance on MGs and SMGs, and later the StG44.