At it again!

[ZekeLuvs1911]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/daily/oct02/snipershootings.htm

Click on the view graphic for number 9 until you get to the smallest graphic and click on the ballistic info box. Tell me if the size of that rd is actually a .308 instead of a .223? Those no good media!

 

[Don Gwinn]

Not an expert on rifle cartridges, but it does look that way. The shoulder should be more abrupt and the slug should be smaller in comparison to the rest of the case, I think. I thought the same thing about the round Katie Couric was rolling around her fingers and showing off in interviews. I don't suppose it matters too much, but one wonders whether Couric thought the .223 didn't show well enough for the camera (or whether she thought the .223 didn't look dangerous enough for the cameras!)

 

[Zander]

Ummm...no, it looks like a .223 to me. Giveaway is the profile of the rim/base geometry. In the .308, you'd have a wider "gap" in the rebate in proportion to the case length.

Never thought about how similar the two were before now...they are quite close in lots of dimensions.

What's more obvious is how many mistakes those nitwits at the WP could make in such a small graphic display.

 

[ZekeLuvs1911]

It is not the issue of the picture but the actual size of the round in the picture itself that is the issue. The statement says "Shown in actual size" but the .223 is smaller than that picture.