How many members would like a firearms discussion area

I want to apologize for the above language. I was used to the censor on the old board automatically changing it.

 

Not true at all, the early History of Firearms can be seen in Pennsylvania where early style Firearms are made according to the old ways.

The method to make high quality Rifled barrels was low tech and not expensive neither were the Guns, these were made one at a time in small shops.

Anyone that could do Blacksmithing, could learn Gunsmithing, and make Black powder as well, it was a time honoured profession.

Funny how Anti-Gun sources seek to Re-Write History with Anti-Gun lies.

 

you would be wrong

individual British archers were not very accurate-Robin Hood aside. British Musket tactics were almost the same as their archery tactics. a musket was far more effective for one man to use against a target than a bow. archers were trained to shoot as fast as possible and it took years to get an archer to the point where he could draw a bow that was 3/4 his weight and shoot it 24 times in less than two minutes. Matchlocks were far obsolete at the time the Constitution was written. The much safer and more efficient flintlock was the standard and a percussion cap-even better-were just around the corner. longbow equipped shooters wouldn't slaughter a company of muskets which actually had far more power and when shot en mass like arrows, had longer range.

BTW I was a national medalist in archery so I know a bit about the subject

 

You must be a fairly strong individual, not to have noticed how much main strength is required to pull even a 50-60 lb bow, and most longbows were 75 to as much as 125 lbs.

The British government passed a law in medieval times saying that all able-bodied men had to practice with the longbow weekly or be fined. Nobody really objected and the weekly bow matches became the sport that enabled Henry to have the cadres of bowmen that won Crecy and Agincourt. Most Continental Armies did not, however, go this much out of their way to have good bowmen and so they largely didn't, which is one reason among many that Britain became a dominant power as France declined, as well as where we get a good part of the tradition of the citizen-soldier.

The other main part of where we get that tradition, however, is from musket carrying commoners. As crappy as you might have found your antique weapon it was still better than just about anything the medieval world could offer to a soldier who was not trained almost from birth. It should also be noted that it took nearly 500 years and considerable advancement before firearms completely supplanted swords, the last (and probably best designed one ever made) one of which was mass issued to British soldiers in 1905

 

Longbows were great en masse but worthless against individual targets one on one. . the bows of 15c england required a great deal of training to pull since they averaged about 100 pounds and the average English archers were small compared to modern Americans. When the Mary Rose sank, the archers were identifiable due to the distortions of their drawing arm bones and shoulder. Longbow archers were judged on how FAST they could shoot, not how accurately. The advantage of a musket was firing from concealment and you could target an individual. and you could teach someone to be a competent musketeer in less than a few months

one of the reasons why British lords didn't worry too much about commoners having bows-was that longbows were almost worthless as an assassination weapon. French nobility-on the other hand-didn't let the peasants own crossbows which were far more effective in taking out a knight than someone with a longbow

 

Well, do we have a gun discussion forum yet? It seems as if the "yes" votes far outweigh the "no" votes, so the members have decided that they want one!

 

Makes one wonder.

 

Well, this poll has been collecting some votes for a while now, and it is now 71 in favor of and 9 against, so I think the yeahs have it. When do we get our new firearms discussion forum?

 

Yes.

Ethics of the Fathers; (excerpt)

......"If not now, when ???".....

Inquiring minds would like to know......

Complete quote:

Hillel the Elder;

" He would also say:
If I am not for myself, who is for me?
And if I am only for myself, what am I?
And if not now, when?"

 

Looks like we are being ignored by the mods. How about that one?

 

Excuse me . . . I quoted you and asked you a question.

 

A .260 remington subforum would be awesome.

 

It has been hard enough to get a Gun Forum, it has not happened yet, a sub-forum may prove even more difficult.

 

Why? It's the least interesting 6.5 round.

 

I shot a Ruger M-77 re-barreled to 6.5-06, 120 gn bullet, it was a light weight Rifle, I was pleasantly surprised at its accuracy, at 300 meters.
The man that built it told me how deer shot with that round rarely took more than 3 steps before collapsing.

 

Lots of 6.5s out there now -- my LR gun is 6.5-06.
140gr Berger VLD over IMR7828 - 3050fps for the hottest loads.
My best 1000yd string of 20 put 19 into a pie plate - one flyer into the 9 ring.

Certain .308: and .338" bullets have better ballistics than a 6.5/140, but you have to drive them hard to use it.

 

I have a 6.5 Grendel chambered upper and have been impressed with it's long range accuracy, even in high wind. The Military is considering going to the 6.5 spc. I have yet to hunt game with the Grendel, but may test it on hogs when I head to Tucson to trek a bit with an old friend in a couple weeks. I have a .458 upper too... the .458 drops em...now.

 

I'd much rather shoot a 140 gr ELD-M at 2700 fps than a 200 grain .308 at 3200 fps.

 

Any and every day.
You'll spend less, too.

 

Just has a number of overall positives compared to other 6.5's.

A little better than creedmoor with heavier bullets.
Suitability for autoloaders.
Plenty of parent brass.
Decent barrel life vs x.284

It may be the .308 of 6.5's, but that isn't a bad place to be.

 

In what way? Hornady 9th edition shows slightly higher MV for the Creedmoor with 140s;

Haven't read any complaints about the CM for AR10s.

Lots of CM out there, and now Lapua's making it.

True. I'd probably have .260 if the 6.5CM wasn't out there.[/quote][/quote]

 

[/quote][/QUOTE]

I think Hornady kind of picked up/ heavily markets the CM. They won't be the best source for showing the (minor) drawbacks of the cartridge vs is competition.

The .260 has slightly higher case capacity, and so allows around 50 fps over CM.

I wouldn't pick a cartridge where +/- 50 fps would matter, but if I have the choice, id take the extra capability-particularly since I most reload heavier rounds at near max velocity out of bolt guns.

Less brass work is required, if you reload.

The exception, would be if you are reloading long projos for an AR (slightly less hot, slightly short), there the CM has a slight advantage not in velocity, but in seating depth with an AR10 mag.

If I had an AR style and didn't already reload for .308 in bolt guns I might consider CM.

Otherwise the numerous small advantages of the .260 add up.

.260 AI seems like an interesting choice too.

 

Im all about shooting smarter, not harder.

What rifle are you using?

 

They designed it from the ground up, so it makes sense that it's heavily marketed.

Isn't part of that increased case capacity due to longer brass, which gives the CM the advantage for high BC bullets for the same OAL?

Still working on my 6.5 CM load with Hornady 140 ELDM. I've got the load, but I just haven't gotten a good velocity measurement. It shoots dead on with factory loads, which is nice.

I would have thought that the steeper shoulder on the CM would be better at reducing brass growth, meaning less trimming. Since I trim every piece with a WFT, there isn't any difference in brass prep (spit).

The rifle I bought was only in 6.5CM, not .260, and if I get serious I'll switch to 6mm when the barrel burns out in a few thousand rounds or so. I don't see a semi in my future, but given the amount of .308 brass I have and the known load data I'd go with that.

Yeah, that would be nice. The LR guys are all switching to 6mm in some flavor.[/quote]