Cartridge cutoff date - how would you do?

ligonierbill · August 3, 2017, 06:34 AM

...or "Arms of the Medicare Brigade".

Some recent "X vs. Y" discussions got me thinking. What if I had to drop every caliber that wasn't older than me? Not an issue for some of you, but that would be 19th century thru the first half of the 20th for me. Here's my score.

For bottom feeders, not much change. Most of the popular rounds are pretty old. It would eliminate .40 S&W and 357 Sig. I like the .40, but I could certainly live without it. It's cousin would be tougher to drop, it interests me, but practically no problem.

Revolvers are a different story. I have plenty of classics, but I like the boomers. I'd have to drop all the >40 caliber magnums. Wouldn't like that. Of course, I'd still have my first big bore, .45 Colt. That would have to do, and you know, it would.

Rifles would take a hit. No belted magnums. But I guess I could just step up to the .375 H&H and have that covered. No 5.56x45. That would not be good. After years of ignoring it, I'm an AR convert. And the anti-gunners detest it, so that one I'd have to keep.

I'm not dumping any guns now, but my last range session consisted of .41 Long Colt and 50-70 Government. Guess I'm regressing.

**44 AMP** · August 3, 2017, 10:11 AM

Quote:

No belted magnums. But I guess I could just step up to the .375 H&H and have that covered.

The .375 H&H is the ORIGINAL belted magnum. 1912

The .300 H&H followed in 1920

Jim Watson · August 3, 2017, 10:24 AM

Considering stuff introduced after 1945, there is not much I would miss.
Does my .22-250 count as in or out? Not commercialized until 1965 but a pretty standard wildcat in the 1930s.

**Aguila Blanca** · August 3, 2017, 10:29 AM

I think I could live without .40 S&W.

I was a bit concerned about .22 LR but, according to Wikipedia, even that dates to 1887. That's a year before my grandfather was born. I would, however, have to give up the .22 Magnum (1959). I'd miss that one, but I'd survive.

griz · August 4, 2017, 02:43 PM

I'm not older than dirt, but I'm older than the 223 by a year or two. I would miss that useful round (insert poodle shooter / mouse gun joke here) but could get by with a 222 I suppose. I still get to keep the 44 mag though, just squeaked under the wire on that one.

RaySendero · August 4, 2017, 08:46 PM

The newest cartridge I've ever owned a firearm in

was introduced in 1956!

FrankenMauser · August 5, 2017, 02:15 AM

The majority would be safe. Nearly everything predates WWII.
But I'd lose all of the .327 Federal revolvers, the .475 Tremor (.458 SOCOM based), the .480 Ruger, and ... I'm thinking ...
Thinking ...
Still rolling it around in the grey matter ...

I think that's it. Besides those three, the newest cartridge (or parent for a wildcat) would be .444 Marlin. -- 1963, 1964, or 1965, depending upon what you consider a cartridge's proper 'date of birth'.

Oh! .307 Winchester.
I'd lose that too. Sounds old. Seems antiquated. Being constantly on the verge of obsolescence makes matters worse. But it wasn't released until 1982.

TXAZ · August 5, 2017, 08:23 AM

Bye bye 6.5 Creedmore from likely everyone on this board. (Circa 2007)
Same for Barrett .416 for the high performance guys. (2004~)

ammo.crafter · August 5, 2017, 09:09 AM

Lots of stuff to chew over.

I've been shooting 41 Long (41 Special) from my S&W mod 57, 41 mag for many years as all magnums are forbidden in the club's indoor range.

Perhaps I could squeak by with this one.

BillM · August 5, 2017, 09:25 AM

1951 here, looks like I would lose:
223/5.56
22 magnum rimfire
40 S&W
Maybe the 3" version 0f 12 ga and .410?

ETA--7.62 x 51 (308). Forgot it was younger than I am!

Heck--quite a few of my GUNS are from before the cutoff.

**44 AMP** · August 5, 2017, 01:15 PM

Interesting game..WHY are we playing???

Better get off the computer, and go back to sending letters with stamps through the Post Office!!

its only fair...

Paul B. · August 5, 2017, 05:04 PM

Having een born, some say hatched in 1938, methinks I'll have to pass on most of the newer good stuff.

Paul B.

mavracer · August 5, 2017, 05:47 PM

I'd only lose 10mm/40 s&w, 480 Ruger and 300 Blackout.
I'd be in very good shape keeping
22lr,22 Mag, 223 Rem, 243 Win, 25 acp, 7.62x25, 30 carbine, 30/30, 30/40, 308, 30-06, 300 win mag, 32 acp, 348 win, 380 acp, 9mm Lugar, 38 super, 38 spec/357 mag, 35 Rem, 9x18, 38/55, 38/40, 44 special, 44 mag, 45 acp, 45 Colt, 45/70 and 20, 16 and 12 gauge.

10-96 · August 5, 2017, 06:11 PM

I'm a 68 model myself. I guess I would only lose my .204 and 6.8... but their parent cartridges would still be around, so I guess I would go through the effort to re-wildcat them. Re-wildcat... is that even a real term?

Screwball · August 5, 2017, 06:30 PM

How would you figure something like .223 Wylde? I mean it is technically 5.56mm... not an actual cartridge.

Really, I'd just lose my .40s... everything else, including 10mm, is older than me. Love having .45s, 9mm, and 5.56mm.

Now, if you were talking firearm designs... we might have an issue.

langenc · August 5, 2017, 07:33 PM

My latest copy of GUNS mag has an article about rifle calibers that are old, still going, and rifles being made for them by 10 out if 14 big time gun makers.

The list of calibers was 10, I believe.

SIGSHR · August 6, 2017, 02:33 PM

Neanderthal that I am, I have NONE of the calibers introduced after I arrived on this earth.

mavracer · August 6, 2017, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Now, if you were talking firearm designs... we might have an issue.

Wouldn't be too big of inconvenience, I could get by with a 1911 a BHP and a J frame for defensive needs add a Superblackhawk for woods and hunting, Most of my long gun designs are older than me.

Heck in a pinch I own enough guns that are actually much older than me to get by.
1903 Colt Pocket 32 made in 1926 for carry
Smith 1917 Army 45 ACP made in 1918 for home defense
Model 10 Remington 12g made in 1928 for hunting
Eddystone 1917 30-06 made in 1918 for big game
Winchester 1890 made in 1911 for small game

**Mike Irwin** · August 7, 2017, 10:23 AM

"The .375 H&H is the ORIGINAL belted magnum. 1912."

No. It wasn't.

The first belted-head case was Holland and Holland's .400/375 Nitro Express, introduced in 1905.

As you can see from this image from Midway, it is quite different from the later .357 H&H Magnum.

Magnum is just a marketing term.

**Mike Irwin** · August 7, 2017, 10:26 AM

The only cartridge I'd have to drop would be .40 S&W. Everything else I have is pre-me (1965).

My .41 Magnum would even squeak in.

August 3, 2017, 06:34 AM	#1
ligonierbill Senior Member Join Date: May 20, 2007 Posts: 2,448	Cartridge cutoff date - how would you do? ...or "Arms of the Medicare Brigade". Some recent "X vs. Y" discussions got me thinking. What if I had to drop every caliber that wasn't older than me? Not an issue for some of you, but that would be 19th century thru the first half of the 20th for me. Here's my score. For bottom feeders, not much change. Most of the popular rounds are pretty old. It would eliminate .40 S&W and 357 Sig. I like the .40, but I could certainly live without it. It's cousin would be tougher to drop, it interests me, but practically no problem. Revolvers are a different story. I have plenty of classics, but I like the boomers. I'd have to drop all the >40 caliber magnums. Wouldn't like that. Of course, I'd still have my first big bore, .45 Colt. That would have to do, and you know, it would. Rifles would take a hit. No belted magnums. But I guess I could just step up to the .375 H&H and have that covered. No 5.56x45. That would not be good. After years of ignoring it, I'm an AR convert. And the anti-gunners detest it, so that one I'd have to keep. I'm not dumping any guns now, but my last range session consisted of .41 Long Colt and 50-70 Government. Guess I'm regressing.

August 4, 2017, 08:46 PM	#6
RaySendero Senior Member Join Date: August 23, 2010 Location: US South Posts: 857	The newest cartridge I've ever owned a firearm in was introduced in 1956! __________________ *Ray*

August 5, 2017, 02:15 AM	#7
FrankenMauser Senior Member Join Date: August 25, 2008 Location: In the valley above the plain Posts: 13,424	The majority would be safe. Nearly everything predates WWII. But I'd lose all of the .327 Federal revolvers, the .475 Tremor (.458 SOCOM based), the .480 Ruger, and ... I'm thinking ... Thinking ... Still rolling it around in the grey matter ... I think that's it. Besides those three, the newest cartridge (or parent for a wildcat) would be .444 Marlin. -- 1963, 1964, or 1965, depending upon what you consider a cartridge's proper 'date of birth'. Oh! .307 Winchester. I'd lose that too. Sounds old. Seems antiquated. Being constantly on the verge of obsolescence makes matters worse. But it wasn't released until 1982. __________________ Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.

August 5, 2017, 08:23 AM	#8
TXAZ Senior Member Join Date: September 5, 2010 Location: McMurdo Sound Texas Posts: 4,322	Bye bye 6.5 Creedmore from likely everyone on this board. (Circa 2007) Same for Barrett .416 for the high performance guys. (2004~) __________________ Cave illos in guns et backhoes

August 5, 2017, 09:09 AM	#9
ammo.crafter Senior Member Join Date: June 25, 2006 Location: The Keystone State Posts: 1,970	which one Lots of stuff to chew over. I've been shooting 41 Long (41 Special) from my S&W mod 57, 41 mag for many years as all magnums are forbidden in the club's indoor range. Perhaps I could squeak by with this one. __________________ "Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading". --Thomas Jefferson

August 3, 2017, 10:24 AM	#3
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,535	Considering stuff introduced after 1945, there is not much I would miss. Does my .22-250 count as in or out? Not commercialized until 1965 but a pretty standard wildcat in the 1930s.

August 3, 2017, 10:29 AM	#4
Aguila Blanca Staff Join Date: September 25, 2008 Location: CONUS Posts: 18,459	I think I could live without .40 S&W. I was a bit concerned about .22 LR but, according to Wikipedia, even that dates to 1887. That's a year before my grandfather was born. I would, however, have to give up the .22 Magnum (1959). I'd miss that one, but I'd survive.

August 4, 2017, 02:43 PM	#5
griz Senior Member Join Date: July 31, 2000 Location: Middle Peninsula, VA Posts: 1,588	I'm not older than dirt, but I'm older than the 223 by a year or two. I would miss that useful round (insert poodle shooter / mouse gun joke here) but could get by with a 222 I suppose. I still get to keep the 44 mag though, just squeaked under the wire on that one.

August 5, 2017, 09:25 AM	#10
BillM Senior Member Join Date: January 20, 2009 Location: Amity Oregon Posts: 791	1951 here, looks like I would lose: 223/5.56 22 magnum rimfire 40 S&W Maybe the 3" version 0f 12 ga and .410? ETA--7.62 x 51 (308). Forgot it was younger than I am! Heck--quite a few of my GUNS are from before the cutoff. Last edited by BillM; August 5, 2017 at 05:31 PM.

August 5, 2017, 01:15 PM	#11
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,813	Interesting game..WHY are we playing??? Better get off the computer, and go back to sending letters with stamps through the Post Office!! its only fair... __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

August 5, 2017, 05:04 PM	#12
Paul B. Senior Member Join Date: March 28, 1999 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 3,801	Having een born, some say hatched in 1938, methinks I'll have to pass on most of the newer good stuff. Paul B. __________________ COMPROMISE IS NOT AN OPTION!

August 5, 2017, 06:11 PM	#14
10-96 Senior Member Join Date: October 19, 2005 Location: Tx Panhandle Territory Posts: 4,159	I'm a 68 model myself. I guess I would only lose my .204 and 6.8... but their parent cartridges would still be around, so I guess I would go through the effort to re-wildcat them. Re-wildcat... is that even a real term? __________________ Rednecks... Keeping the woods critter-free since March 2, 1836. (TX Independence Day) I suspect a thing or two... because I've seen a thing or two.

August 5, 2017, 06:30 PM	#15
Screwball Senior Member Join Date: May 16, 2012 Location: ME Posts: 771	How would you figure something like .223 Wylde? I mean it is technically 5.56mm... not an actual cartridge. Really, I'd just lose my .40s... everything else, including 10mm, is older than me. Love having .45s, 9mm, and 5.56mm. Now, if you were talking firearm designs... we might have an issue.

August 5, 2017, 07:33 PM	#16
langenc Senior Member Join Date: August 19, 2007 Location: Montmorency Co, MI Posts: 1,551	My latest copy of GUNS mag has an article about rifle calibers that are old, still going, and rifles being made for them by 10 out if 14 big time gun makers. The list of calibers was 10, I believe.

August 6, 2017, 02:33 PM	#17
SIGSHR Senior Member Join Date: September 13, 2005 Posts: 4,700	Neanderthal that I am, I have NONE of the calibers introduced after I arrived on this earth.

August 7, 2017, 10:23 AM	#19
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,380	"The .375 H&H is the ORIGINAL belted magnum. 1912." No. It wasn't. The first belted-head case was Holland and Holland's .400/375 Nitro Express, introduced in 1905. As you can see from this image from Midway, it is quite different from the later .357 H&H Magnum. Magnum is just a marketing term. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

August 7, 2017, 10:26 AM	#20
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,380	The only cartridge I'd have to drop would be .40 S&W. Everything else I have is pre-me (1965). My .41 Magnum would even squeak in. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.