So I've been thinking of making the next barrel for my favorite rifle a .260 Remington instead of a .308 Win.
Thanks largely to Zak's articles, I'm pretty well convinced that I might as well do it, even if it means sitting down for a whole day to reform my .308 brass. That being said, a couple more questions if you don't mind:
1. Does .260 Rem give up anything to .308 Win in terms of inherent "shooting-for-groups" accuracy? As much as I enjoy shooting steel out at 600 yards, I probably shoot at 100-yard paper 20 times more. And when I find myself shooting at paper, I'm always going for that 0.25" group instead of that 0.75" group. Presumably, both cartridges give up something to the 6-mm benchrest-oriented stuff.
2. A friend asked me this the other day, and I had no answer: Why are we always looking at short-action cartridges for long-range shooting? I suppose I shouldn't say I had no answer. I pointed out that the 6.5x284 and a couple of magnum cartridges I know are real barrel-eaters, for one.
Anyway, the first question is likely more important, as I do want to keep the existing action on this rifle. If there's a logical third option in the .260/.308 world that smokes them both for "micro-accuracy," for lack of a better term, I might need to look into that cartridge too. I suspect it makes no difference until you get to the real stubby weird stuff, though.
Thanks largely to Zak's articles, I'm pretty well convinced that I might as well do it, even if it means sitting down for a whole day to reform my .308 brass. That being said, a couple more questions if you don't mind:
1. Does .260 Rem give up anything to .308 Win in terms of inherent "shooting-for-groups" accuracy? As much as I enjoy shooting steel out at 600 yards, I probably shoot at 100-yard paper 20 times more. And when I find myself shooting at paper, I'm always going for that 0.25" group instead of that 0.75" group. Presumably, both cartridges give up something to the 6-mm benchrest-oriented stuff.
2. A friend asked me this the other day, and I had no answer: Why are we always looking at short-action cartridges for long-range shooting? I suppose I shouldn't say I had no answer. I pointed out that the 6.5x284 and a couple of magnum cartridges I know are real barrel-eaters, for one.
Anyway, the first question is likely more important, as I do want to keep the existing action on this rifle. If there's a logical third option in the .260/.308 world that smokes them both for "micro-accuracy," for lack of a better term, I might need to look into that cartridge too. I suspect it makes no difference until you get to the real stubby weird stuff, though.