« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: RECOIL 260 VS 7-08  (Read 390 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline ONE HOLE 4570

  • Trade Count: (33)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 756
RECOIL 260 VS 7-08
« on: December 29, 2006, 05:04:07 AM »
Looking at Chuck Hawks recoil table the same rifle in a 260 rem or a 7-08 shooting the same bullet 140gr should have a very close recoil. Powder would be close within a few grains & vel would be close a few hundred fps so the recoil I guess would be within 1/10 or so.
I plugged in his #'s into the formula but did not get the same answers :( not the sharpes crayon in the box). Anyone have a plug in formula online
Logged
That's my boy, GOD BLESS AMERICA!!

Online Graybeard

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (69)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26941
  • Gender: Male
Re: RECOIL 260 VS 7-08
« Reply #1 on: December 29, 2006, 08:38:40 AM »
Forget forumla's just use logic. Same case, slightly different bore size. So same bullet weight, same rifle weight equal same recoil. Yes because of bore size expansion ratio is a wee bit different and so will powder charge weight BUT push the same bullet weight to same velocity in same weight rifles and your shoulder will not know the difference.
Logged


Bill aka the Graybeard
President, Graybeard Outdoor Enterprises
256-435-1125

I am not a lawyer and do not give legal advice.

Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life anyone who believes in Him will have everlasting life!

Offline Gregory

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
  • Gender: Male
Re: RECOIL 260 VS 7-08
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2006, 11:42:39 AM »
In my Load From a Disk recoil calculation you plug in muzzle velocity, weight of the firearm, weight of the bullet, and weight of the powder charge.  If all of those variables are the same then the recoil will be the same.

Logged
Greg

NRA Endowment Life Member
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Second Amendment, U.S. Constitution (1791)
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »