|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 27, 2012, 05:55 PM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 6, 1999
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
Posts: 6,004
|
"Correct me if I'm wrong but what might be called hunting or target ammo wasn't nearly as available as what we have today. "
Winchester Super-X was good hunting ammo. Remington Golden bullets weren't bad decades ago. Mini Mags were introduced in 1962 and provided an option. "Cheaper ammo (i.e. Winchester Wildcats, Federal Lightnings, Remington T-bolts, etc) came in little 50 round boxes and we bought it in bricks (500 rounds). Same cheap kinda ammo" That's more recent ammo. Does it get any worse than those brands? I only know which brands receive the most complaints year after year. Dynapoints were the exception it seems. "I haven't seen anyone talk about time travel in this thread" Only you. We're discussing decades of personal experience with rimfire ammo - including the current stuff. I don't know what you're going on about. |
November 28, 2012, 08:15 PM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2012
Location: NV
Posts: 743
|
So what does more tissue damage, the longer skinnier .22lr, or the shorter fatter .25scp?
|
November 28, 2012, 08:19 PM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Posts: 10,985
|
There probably isn't much difference.
Are you thinking the .22 will tumble on impact? I wouldn't bet on that! |
November 29, 2012, 01:03 AM | #54 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2012
Location: NV
Posts: 743
|
Quote:
Yes, I stated something like that before, that's what I was thinking. Maybe not at pistol velocities I guess, I don't know. Sometime length does matter. |
|
|
|