Cartridge standards seem ignored a lot?

[saywhaaat]

I'm doing my reading on reloading and different cartridges, and it seems a few things which you'd assume were pretty set are largely "guides" ?

COAL for example...

.308 COAL is 2.8" according to most people, ok great.

But then you have rifles where the magazine is too short to fit 2.8" cartridges and they have to be shorter.

Then you get rifles where for your hand loads if you want the bullet to be just off the lands you have to seat it higher making the COAL longer that 2.8"

That's just one cartridge example obviously, but seems common enough across the board?

[Harper]

Don't forget in your example there that 2.8" is maximum COAL.

It's not a mandatory length for all things.

[Turkle]

I guess those specs were set out by Winchester when the cartridge was developed 60 years ago too...

Obviously a lot has come along since then and can be more flexible?

[SendIt]

You're only focusing on one thing is the issue.

COAL isn't what makes it a .308... There is bullet, neck, shoulder,base and rim diameter, rim thickness, case length, capacity...

COAL is just about the least important factor in the whole scheme of it.