6mm Creedmoor

If you're only at those ranges it won't make a difference, .223 shoots real flat there and is cheap.

>>33602471
Yeah, I thought so already. Shame there are no longer ranges around. I'd love to get into long-range target shooting

>>33602408
A fun round you should try is 17 hornet.


It is a tack driver abs lots of fun at 300 yrd or less.

>>33602408
6mm caliber is far better than 5.56mm caliber. That little increase in size gives you better sectional density. It's a mathematical principle that larger objects have higher sectional density.

>>33603579
6.5mm caliber is far better than 6mm caliber. That little increase in size gives you better sectional density. It's a mathematical principle that larger objects have higher sectional density.

>>33603579
>>33603600
7mm caliber is far better than 6.5mm caliber. That little increase in size gives you better sectional density. It's a mathematical principle that larger objects have higher sectional density.

File: 1489809471946.jpg (18KB, 327x316px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 327x316px

>>33603621
>he doesnt shoot .950 jdj

>>33603600
And that's true. 50 caliber has even better sectional density. The limiting factor to caliber size is how much recoil you are willing to tolerate to propel your bullet to an acceptable initial velocity. For all practical purposes, the happy balance between ballistic performance and recoil is a 7mm magnum with a heavy for caliber bullet.

>>33603621
>>33603600
>>33603579
105mm caliber is far better than 7mm caliber. That little increase in size gives you better sectional density. It's a mathematical principle that larger objects have higher sectional density

>>33603665
See my post at >>33603640

Yes, 105 mm guns have excellent ballistics. They shoot much flatter than a smaller bullet would given the same initial velocity.

>>33603675
>being this much of a newfag
You ruined a neww meme, you sperglord. No one cares about you atusticness.

We were making history, and you just blew up out train tracks.

>>33603579
>>33603600
>>33603621
>>33603665
120mm caliber is far better than 7mm caliber. That little increase in size gives you better sectional density. It's a mathematical principle that larger objects have higher sectional density

File: 1024px-TheTsarCannonJuly2004.jpg (243KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1024x768px

>>33603770
890mm is far better than 120mm caliber. That little increase in size gives you better sectional density. It's a mathematical principle that larger objects have higher sectional density.

File: mallets.jpg (353KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 1024x768px

>>33604456
914mm is far better than 890mm caliber. That little increase in size gives you better sectional density. It's a mathematical principle that larger objects have higher sectional density

File: rammstein penis cannon.jpg (120KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1920x1080px

>>33604669
The Rammstein penis cannon is far better than 914mm. That little increase in size gives you better sexual performance. It's a sexual fact that larger penises give better performance.

File: pwymk0g.jpg (81KB, 618x423px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 618x423px

>>33606089
The dindu cannon is far better than Rammstein Penis Cannon. That little increase in size gives you better display of performance. It's a patriarchy fact that larger display give better performance in controlling your property.