Questions for brian56

[Shu]

Read a post from Brian 56 on something else. He signed Brian @ remmington. Would like to get remmingtons official word on a few things.
1) New calibers such as 327. 357 max, 460 s&W, 38-55 BC.
Well I don't want to make a wish list.

[Spanky]

I'd rather see a 25-20 and 32-20 than the 327.
And a 30-30 with BC wood on it.



Spanky

[gcrank1]

327 should have the same cartridge virtues as the 357Max, the 32S&W short, Long, and H&R Mag should work too, plus reloadable with carbide dies. Back when Skeeter was still alive and the H&R Mag was introduced he chrono'ed it and the then current 32-20s, the H&R had more beans.
Ive had the 25-20 and 32-20, Id go for the 327, or even the Mag version first, and in a 25 I have the 25-35, which shoots the light 25-20 bullets as well as heavier (faster twist than the old, std. 25-20). If they quickened the twist a bit for a 25-20 I could still see it for heavier than 87gr., but sub, or barely, sonic loads.
The big reason for me in either cal. is that those stubby little light bullets have such a lousy ballistic coefficient, about like a 40-45gr. 22Hornet, and nobody shoots those against longer,heavier bullets at targets or varmints. It would just make the chambering that much more useful and well rounded.

[Spanky]

327 should have the same cartridge virtues as the 357Max, the 32S&W short, Long, and H&R Mag should work too, plus reloadable with carbide dies. Back when Skeeter was still alive and the H&R Mag was introduced he chrono'ed it and the then current 32-20s, the H&R had more beans.
Ive had the 25-20 and 32-20, Id go for the 327, or even the Mag version first, and in a 25 I have the 25-35, which shoots the light 25-20 bullets as well as heavier (faster twist than the old, std. 25-20). If they quickened the twist a bit for a 25-20 I could still see it for heavier than 87gr., but sub, or barely, sonic loads.
The big reason for me in either cal. is that those stubby little light bullets have such a lousy ballistic coefficient, about like a 40-45gr. 22Hornet, and nobody shoots those against longer,heavier bullets at targets or varmints. It would just make the chambering that much more useful and well rounded.

I shoot deer with my 22 Hornet with 45gr. ammo. I'm not sure about the ballistic coefficient thing but it kills 'em dead.   The 25-20 and 32-20 kill deer dead too if the person holding the gun knows how to shoot. If they all kill deer I'll bet they work pretty good on varmints too.



Spanky

[gcrank1]

You are right; I really should have said 'long range targets and varmints'. Brevity is my undoing......
The .22H has a long and successful record as a short range varminter, and Ive had two. I also know some people have killed a lot of , as you mention, deer with it and even the .22RF, but Ive never read a hunting author who encourages it, and some DNRs stipulate against them, and Ive never done it nor would try unless in a strictly suvival situation.
But more to my point, at the National Matches, etc., when shooters of the .223 tried to compete against the much higher BC .30cal. bullets with a short stubby, low BC .223 bullet they did not do well.
In fact, if you check the BCs, a typical 22H 45gr .22 bullet has about the same BC as a .30cal. 115gr.. Who is using that for long range target or varmint or deer?
I think in WI the long standing record buck (well, long 'hanging') until recently was killed with a 25-35, and the 25-20 and 32-40 have done a lot of good work and are still good walk about calibers. But again, unless a survival situation I dont think any of us would advocate their use for deer over a lot of better suited caliber.