Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 09/01/2018 in all areas

  1. ^^ Hates hearing counter points...so get sarcastic as a defense mechanism.
    2 points
  2. The .30-06 is still full velocity, I was averaging 2600fps for the AP rounds and the standard ball ammo was right around 2800fps which matches the army manuals within about 50fps. Never ran the .303 Brit across the chronograph but it was normal for felt recoil. I know the US military hasn't fielded a firearm chambered in .30-06 since the Korean war so I doubt they have a reason to keep huge stockpiles of 60-70 year old ammo. No clue when the British shelved the .303 cartridge but I am sure it was around the time that 7.62Nato took over. As for defending myself with a 100 year old bolt action British rifle, that would be a poor choice regardless of it being old/new/reloaded ammo. The Garand in .30-06 is not an ideal choice but it is way better than a bolt gun. BTW my house gun is a 12gauge pump. As for ammo effectiveness on the 70 year old .30-06 armor piercing ammo. Here is the front and back side of a piece of 3/4inch thick plate steel where several of the bullets had no problem pushing out the back side.
    1 point
  3. because if they don't spend, their budgets get cut?
    1 point
  4. Probably? If it was stored in reasonable conditions, the propellant and primer should be fine. If powder wasn't burning you'd have a really dirty firearm, and cycling failures.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×
×
  • Create New...