XSIVSPD
Well-Known Member
So... Something that I've never understood on here....
Why are so many people obsessed with trying to match long action ballistics and terminal performance from short action rifles?
Because it saves 2-4oz? It seems like there are a myriad of less complicated ways to do that while hunting.
Is it because the short action is theoretically marginally stiffer? Has anyone actually been able to prove that that matters?
Is it because of the marginally quicker cycling time? I can see that in a competitive sport, but how many hunters practice bolt manipulation enough for it to be a real advantage?
People will spend all kids of time/money on Gunsmith ING and special reamers/dies to try to make a 300wsm beat a 300win mag. Or a 7saum beat a 7rem mag. It just seems like there's no real, tangible benefits to trying to do that. Just use a long action and run a bigger cartridge instead of trying to over pressure a small one.
What am I missing here?
Why are so many people obsessed with trying to match long action ballistics and terminal performance from short action rifles?
Because it saves 2-4oz? It seems like there are a myriad of less complicated ways to do that while hunting.
Is it because the short action is theoretically marginally stiffer? Has anyone actually been able to prove that that matters?
Is it because of the marginally quicker cycling time? I can see that in a competitive sport, but how many hunters practice bolt manipulation enough for it to be a real advantage?
People will spend all kids of time/money on Gunsmith ING and special reamers/dies to try to make a 300wsm beat a 300win mag. Or a 7saum beat a 7rem mag. It just seems like there's no real, tangible benefits to trying to do that. Just use a long action and run a bigger cartridge instead of trying to over pressure a small one.
What am I missing here?