PDA

View Full Version : Where does it end?


cheygriz
April 11, 2005, 11:25 AM
:rolleyes: Here's a thought. :rolleyes:

The trend these days seems toward shorter, shorter, or even shortest possible magnum rifle cartridges. The problem is that many of these are belted, which does not enhance accuracy.

Why not shorten and neck down the .416 Rigby case to .308 length and .30 calibre. That way, we could have an accurate rifle capable of .300 Weatherby ballistics in a .308 length package, and without that damnable belt?

Or better yet, (tongue planted firmly in cheek) shorten and neck down the .50 BMG case to .338 and have a cartridge equivalent to the .338 LaPua in a short .308 length action! But why stop there? Why not neck down a 40MM Bofors to................ :D :D

Jart
April 11, 2005, 12:00 PM
neck down the .416 Rigby case to .308 length and .30 calibre. That way, we could have an accurate rifle capable of .300 Weatherby ballistics in a .308 length package, and without that damnable belt?

I could be way off here, but isn't that pretty much the genisis of the .300 Remington Ultra Mag?

cntryboy1289
April 11, 2005, 12:13 PM
The Rem and Winchester short mags use a case derived from the 404 jeffries case which isn't belted. For the rest of the question, I think the manufacturers have already done what you want with the 325 WSM for the .338 mag. It gives about the same velocity and energy with a 8mm caliber bullet as the .338 does. The only thing is that it does this up to a certain point of diminishing returns for certain weights of bullets. As to why not do this with all calibers, they tried it with the most popular calibers and some just haven't been able to generate the same velocity and energy without going way over the pressure limits of the rifle. There will always be wildcatters out there who will try some of what you want. The only thing is, if it's not feasible money wise, they won't make it to the market.

DR_MAX
April 13, 2005, 05:28 PM
The non-belted Rigby case would get the nod for better feeding, but otherwise, the 30-378 is essentially what you are describing. It, by the way, appears to be the hottest of the current 30 caliber genre. I believe someone has tried wildcatting the 50 BMG necked to 30 cal, but ran into severe throat erosion problems within a very few rounds. As for me, I still haven't gotten over the "new" of my Ruger M77II in 300 Winny.

Jseime
April 13, 2005, 06:54 PM
How about we weed out all of these stunted runt magnums and super duper star-destroyer mags and go back to shooting normal rounds like .22-250, .243, .25-06, .270, 7mm Mag, and .30-06.
Just my opinion and I cant see this one change. The only short mag that I would look at is the .325WSM and I dont have a use for a caliber of that size. Anything that I would do with a .325WSM (moose+elk) I'd do with a .30-06 too and probably get good results with that.

cheygriz
April 13, 2005, 10:53 PM
hehehehehe,

I totally agree!

With a .22LR, a .30-06, and a .375 H&H, I would feel "properly" armed to hunt anything in the entire world!

This thread was started very much "tongue in cheek" to kind of take a shot at the current "caliber of the week" silliness.

cntryboy1289
April 14, 2005, 12:57 AM
I love my 300WSM. I didn't have a 300 WM and wanted one. I came upon the Short Mag and really liked the idea. I take it you don't like the short magnums. That is fine, but for those of us who do like them, we do have our reasons. One of those is less felt recoil and as good or better velocity with as good or better accuracy. My rifle is my rifle..........

I really love it when folks go out and buy a new truck or car each year just because it is a new car or truck and then come here and bitch about new calibers. This may not be you, but it follows the same line of thinking for a lot of folks. Why did they come up with that caliber or that design or that setup of stock and barrel. They do it because folks like to have something new now and then. Some fall by the wayside and some move on. A very fine example of this is the 6mm Remington and the .243 win. One came out with a faster twist and succeeded and one came out with a slow twist and failed. The only thing is that when you put the fast twist barrel on the 6mm Rm, it wins hands down in velocity and energy. Go figure as to why Remington didn't use the fast twist barrel, the blooming idiots.

Lycanthrope
April 14, 2005, 09:31 AM
There's a reason the 6PPC dominates benchrest with it's short stubby casing.

With all factors being equalized, a caliber with a more efficient burn rate will hold better groupings versus one that duplicates the performance with less efficiency. YOU may feel 1MOA is enough for your gun, but I'm only satisfied with less than half that. I stack the deck to that end.

Other advantages to going short are the rigidity of the shorter action and the uselfullness of some of these calibers being used on the AR15 platform.

I don't bash the short mags. In fact, my favorite rifle is a very inefficient 7mmSTW, but if new calibes bring more people to shooting, more revenue to our sport and offer more options to our armed forces.....who cares? We all benefit.

Ruger4570
April 14, 2005, 09:58 AM
I have to laugh at the Gun writers. The 284 Win. died a long time ago because of the press. It has a "short stubby" case and "oh my God" a rebated case!! And even worse, it is so short that heavy bullets must be seated deeper in the case limiting powder space (never mind, heavy bullets use less powder and need less space).Now all the newer rounds are short, stubby and have rebated heads. I wonder at writers and shooters that will argue endlessly about their favorite round that will do 50 FPS faster than another as the best, or shoot .02" flatter at 100 yards as being incredably superior.
It would seem that the newest rounds are a product of evolution (possibly marketing, maybe both). I don't own one but I have heard a lot of good comments (mostly from writers). If these new rounds are what they say,welcome "fare well and prosper"

DR_MAX
April 14, 2005, 05:23 PM
This whole line of viewpoints is very interesting stuff about the creation/evolution of new calibers and configurations. It would be really interesting to go back and read the reactions of gun writers and sportmen on the new rounds like 30-06, 375 H&H, 222 Remington, 243 Winchester, etc.
Some belly flop and some go on seemingly forever. Only time will tell. I wonder how the electronic ignition thing is working out?