...... there had been a .260 Winchester instead of a .270 Winchester?

No, only if there was a .260 Creedmoor....

I actually like the 6.5 PRC. Hots the 264 Win Mag in a shorter, but not overly fat, case.

quote:

posted 18 December 2020 20:00 Hide Post
No, only if there was a .260 Creedmoor....

A few thousands of bullet diameter will provide a topic of conversation and argument for decades.

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by nopride2:
A few thousands of bullet diameter will provide a topic of conversation and argument for decades.

Dave

Ain't it the truth, that .007" difference between a 7mm and a 270 in particular.

I challange the statements to a degree, not so much the difference in a 270 and a 280, but in big bores the cross section of the bullet makes a hell of a lot of difference to those that are open to stopping charges and punching bigger holes in bad beasts!! It seems miniscule to the greenhorn math expert, but not to those that have shot large numbers of large animals..

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
No, only if there was a .260 Creedmoor....

Yep! I guess the name "Creedmoor" attached to any rifle has pissed off gun enthusiasts for over 100 years. I have a Pedersoli reproduction of the model 1877 Sharps Creedmoor in 45-70. Even though it shoots really well and is nice to look at it is a Creedmoor....damnit